i!         I 


Cohuttbia  Itntbcrsittp 


LIBRARY 


GIVEN   BY 

Henry  Osborn  Taylor 


J  Kor^    liapef    al'r a  Juii   akiccTLtia.    nwriale    cr<?/iiunt; 

J^XrnlornJancU  ^iri    ijU>  ami   mcnunLOnJ-a-^fuju-rartf  ■ 
^^Icnlcn,  non    itieniuirt. ,  i-cJntcG  ji aui^  amaj"- 


WESSEL   GANSFORT 

LIFE  AND  WRITINGS 

BY 

EDWARD   WAITE   MILLER,   D.D. 

SOMETIME     PROFESSOR      OF    CHURCH      HISTORY     IN     AUBURN     THEOLOGICAL 

SEMINARY 

PRINCIPAL  WORKS 

TRANSLATED  BY 

JARED  WATERBURY   SCUDDER,  M.A. 

PROFESSOR    OF   THE    LATIN    LANGUAGE    IN    THE    ALBANY    ACADEMY 


"  If  I  had  read  his  works  earlier  my  enemies  might  think  that  Luther 
had  absorbed  everything  from  Wessel,  his  spirit  is  so  in  accord  with  mine." 

— Luther's  Letter  to  Rhodius. 


IN  TWO  VOLUMES 
VOLUME  ONE 

ILLUSTRATED 


G.  P.  PUTNAM'S  SONS 

NEW  YORK  AND    LONDON 

XLbc  1knicJ?erbocfter  press 

1917 


^    2.  irtr^ 


Copyright,   1917 

BY 

CATHERINE  GANSEVOORT  LANSING 


ITbe  Iftnfcfeerbocfter  ipress,  "IRew  JtJorft 


€f> 


This  work  is  published  as  Special  Volume  Number  One  in 
the  Papers  of  the  American  Society  of  Church  History. 


«p«ra 


»    f 


The  Gansfort  Coat  of  Arms 


This  study  of  Wessel  Gansfort  was  undertaken  at  the  suggestion  and 
has  been  carried  forward  under  the  generous  encouragement  of  Mrs. 
Abraham  Lansing,  nee  Catherine  Gansevoort,  of  Albany,  New  York, 
whose  interest  therein  is  due  to  her  descent  from  the  family  of  this  dis- 
tinguished Dutch  theologian. 

The  American  branch  of  the  Gansfort  family,  which  has  given  to  this 
country  some  notable  pubhc  men  and  gallant  soldiers,  has  always  cherished 
its  old-world  traditions  and  retained  the  family  coat  of  arms.  Several 
of  its  members  have  made  pilgrimage  to  Groningen,  in  northern  Holland, 
affectionately  regarded  by  them  as  their  mother-city. 

While  visiting  there  with  his  family  in  i860,  Peter  Gansevoort,  the 
father  of  Mrs.  Lansing,  reverently  witnessed  the  removal  of  the  bones  of 
Wessel  from  their  original  resting-place  in  the  cloister  of  the  Spiritual 
Virgins  and  their  re-interment  with  impressive  ceremonies  in  the  venerable 
Church  of  St.  Martin.  At  the  same  time,  also,  were  begun  those  radical 
alterations  which  have  changed  the  house  in  which  Wessel  was  born  and 
lived  as  a  child  into  the  modernized  structure  which  now  bears  the 
Gansfort  coat  of  arms. 

In  the  journal  of  Henry  S.  Gansevoort,  who  accompanied  his  father  to 
Groningen,  there  is  an  extended  account  of  these  incidents  in  their  visit 
to  the  family  shrine.  The  interest  thus  early  awakened  led  him  in  after 
years  to  undertake  a  translation  into  English  of  Professor  William  Muur- 
ling's  admirable  treatise  on  Wessel. 

Thus  in  her  patronage  of  the  present  effort  to  present  to  English 
readers  this  mediaeval  scholar  and  reformer,  Mrs.  Lansing  confirms  the 
interest  of  her  family  in  its  most  famous  representative,  and  fulfills  the 
purpose  of  her  beloved  and  lamented  brother. 

E.  W.  M. 

New  York, 
April,  191 7. 


FOREWORD 

The  four-hundredth  anniversary  of  the  beginning  of  the 
Reformation  may  well  revive  interest  in  the  precursors  of 
the  Reformers.  The  Protestant  movement  is  no  longer 
regarded  as  in  the  nature  of  a  revolution,  but  as  the 
product  of  tendencies  long  developing  in  the  medieval 
Church  and  society.  The  intellectual  ancestors  of  the 
Reformers  have  been  discovered,  and  the  roots  of  the 
political  and  social  changes  that  accompanied  the  intro- 
duction of  Protestantism  have  been  traced  far  back  into 
the  preceding  centuries. 

Among  those  who  unquestionably  made  important 
contribution  to  the  preparation  of  the  Rhine  region  for  the 
acceptance  of  the  Protestant  doctrine  was  Wessel  Gans- 
fort  who  began  and  ended  his  life  in  the  city  of  Gronin- 
gen,  in  the  northern  Netherlands.  He  has  been  somewhat 
neglected  by  recent  students  of  the  origins  of  Protestant- 
ism, although  Ullmann  had  honored  him  with  the  fore- 
most place  among  his  Reformers  before  the  Reformation. 
That  he  has  not  attracted  more  attention  may  be  due,  as 
Luther  suggests,  to  his  quiet,  uneventful  career  as  a  man 
of  the  schools.  There  were  no  dramatic  episodes  in  his 
life,  no  clashes  with  the  civil  or  ecclesiastical  authority, 
no  occasions  for  the  display  of  heroic  courage.  Once  for 
a  little  time  he  consciously  faced  the  fire,  but  a  powerful 
friend  promptly  intervened  and  saved  him  from  the 
threatened  ordeal. 

That  he  has  not  attracted  the  attention  of  American 
scholars  may  be  explained,  in  part  at  least,  by  the  fact  that 
so  few  copies  of  his  works  are  to  be  found  in  this  country. 


vi  Foreword 

From  a  recently  conducted  questionnaire,  in  which  enquiry 
was  sent  to  over  a  hundred  of  our  leading  libraries,  it 
would  appear  that  not  more  than  a  half-dozen  copies  of 
Wessel's  writings  are  accessible  to  American  students.  As 
might  be  expected,  the  New  Brunswick  Theological 
Seminary  of  the  Dutch  Reformed  Church  has  the  largest 
collection  of  his  writings.  But  this  consists  of  only  two 
volumes;  the  small,  crudely  printed  first  edition  of  the 
Farrago,  and  the  complete  edition  of  his  surviving  works 
issued  in  Groningen  in  1614.  This  complete  edition  is 
possessed  also  by  the  Andover-Harvard  Seminary  Li- 
brary and  has  been  recently  acquired  by  that  of  Princeton. 
Union  Seminary  in  New  York  City  has  a  copy  of  one  of  the 
later  editions  of  the  Farrago  handsomely  bound  in  tooled 
vellum  with  Erasmus's  devotional  classic,  the  Enchiridion, 
a  most  significant  combination.  In  the  library  of  the 
Rochester  Seminary  are  two  copies  of  the  edition  of  the 
Farrago  issued  in  Basel  in  1523.  Luther's  letter  is  pre- 
fixed as  an  introduction. 

The  New  York  City  Library  possesses  three  small  vol- 
umes containing  writings  by  Wessel,  which  once  belonged 
to  the  famous  collection  of  Richard  Heber  of  London. 
They  are  bound  alike  and  were  printed  by  the  same 
press,  but  offer  no  clue  as  to  the  time  or  place  of  their 
publication.  One  contains  the  treatise  on  Prayer,  another 
that  on  the  Eucharist  and  the  third  a  collection  of  Letters 
with  the  Impugnatorium  of  Anthony  de  Castro,  which  is 
a  violent  attack  upon  Wessel's  teachings  regarding  In- 
dulgences. The  contents  of  these  three  volumes,  printed 
in  identically  the  same  form,  together  with  the  earliest 
edition  of  the  Farrago  form  the  chief  material  in  a  volume 
of  Wessel's  writings  owned  by  Mrs.  Abraham  Lansing  of 
Albany,  N.  Y.,  to  whose  father,  Peter  Gansevoort,  it  was 
presented  by  his  friend,  Harmanus  Bleecker,  Minister  to 
The  Hague,  under  Martin  Van  Buren. 


Foreword  vii 

Hitherto,  apart  from  brief  articles  in  biographical  and 
religious  encyclopedias,  a  life  of  Wessel  can  hardly  be  said 
to  have  been  written  in  English.  The  scholarly  treat- 
ment of  Ullmann  in  his  Rcjormatoren  vor  der  Reforma- 
tion was  issued  in  Enghsh  in  1855,  but  it  presents  Wessel 
in  conjunction  with  several  others  and  so  subordinates  the 
story  of  his  life  to  the  discussion  of  his  theological  views 
that  it  does  not  afford  a  very  clear  image  of  the  man. 

It  is  this  simpler  task  that  the  present  treatment  under- 
takes. It  attempts  to  set  Wessel  against  the  background 
of  his  times,  tracing  his  development,  evaluating  his 
achievements,  and  offering  a  criticism  of  the  three  groups 
of  writings  that  here  appear  in  translation.  It  has  seemed 
best  not  to  detain  the  reader  with  the  considerations  that 
have  led  to  the  conclusions  presented,  nor  to  encumber  the 
pages  with  references  to  authorities.  So  far  as  citations 
are  made  from  the  writings  of  Wessel  contained  in  these 
volumes,  the  index  will  indicate  their  location.  For  other 
references,  the  student  is  referred  to  the  admirable  annota- 
tions in  the  biographies  by  Muurling  and  Ullmann. 

The  circumstances  under  which  these  studies  have  been 
pursued  during  the  brief  vacations  permitted  by  the  duties 
of  an  administrative  position  have  imposed  distinct  limita- 
tions upon  the  field  covered,  and  have  made  impossible 
those  completer  researches  which  residence  abroad  would 
have  permitted.  While  intended  for  the  ordinary  reader 
of  history  rather  than  the  technical  scholar,  it  is  hoped, 
that  the  more  critical  chapters  toward  the  end  of 
the  biography  and  the  translations  that  follow  may  be 
of  important  service  to  students  of  the  Church  of  the 
fifteenth  century.  No  attempt  is  here  made  at  an  exposi- 
tion of  Wessel's  theological  teachings,  though  the  time  is 
ripe  for  a  revised  edition  of  Ullmann's  work  in  that  field 
or  an  entirely  new  study  in  the  light  of  modern  theological 
criteria. 


viii  Foreword 

These  studies  have  opened  many  tempting  lines  of  in- 
vestigation which  students  of  the  preparation  for  the 
Reformation  may  be  disposed  to  follow,  for  example: 
What  references  to  Wessel's  teachings  concerning  the 
Eucharist  are  to  be  found  in  the  correspondence  of  the 
Reformers  relative  to  this  sacrament?  What  edition  or 
editions  of  the  Scriptures  does  Wessel  quote  from  so 
copiously?  Are  any  fragments  of  his  Mare  Magnum  to 
be  found  in  the  libraries  of  the  Netherlands?  Did  any 
contemporary  writers  hold  his  opinion  that  there  is  no 
other  purgatory  than  paradise  ?  Whence  did  he  derive 
his  conception  of  an  Eternal  Gospel,  and  what  place,  if 
any,  did  it  have  in  the  teachings  of  the  Reformers?  Had 
he  an  original  psychology?  What  were  Wessel's  exact  re- 
lations to  the  Universities  of  Paris  and  Basel  and  Heidel- 
berg? What  were  the  influences  alluded  to  by  Luther 
and  others  which  restricted  the  circulation  of  Wessel's 
writings  both  before  and  after  they  were  printed  ? 

The  chief  sources  for  a  life  of  Wessel  are  the  relatively 
few  biographical  references  in  his  own  writings  and  the 
sketch  by  Hardenberg,  who  wrote  while  there  were  still 
living  many  who  knew  Wessel  intimately.  This  sketch, 
though  fragmentary  and  marred  by  inaccuracies  and 
material  not  germane  to  the  subject,  is  invaluable.  The 
still  briefer  sketch  by  Geldenhauer,  written  about  the 
same  time,  adds  little  of  importance.  Besides  the  data 
afforded  by  the  above,  the  writer  has  used  freely  the 
material  gathered  by  Muurling,  Ullmann,  De  Groot,  and 
others.  A  translation  of  the  early  sketches  of  Wessel's 
life  has  been  appended,  partly  for  the  use  of  those  who  may 
desire  access  to  these  hitherto  inaccessible  sources,  and 
partly  because  they  incorporate  some  human  documents 
of  inherent  interest. 

There  are  certain  problems  as  to  the  sequence  of  events 
in  Wessel's  life  that  are  quite  insoluble  because  of  the  in- 


Foreword  ix 

adequate  data  and  because  as  Bayle  remarks  "lies  in 
abundance  have  been  told  about  this  remarkable  man. " 
Nevertheless,  the  main  outlines  of  his  career  and  character 
can  be  rather  sharply  drawn.  They  are  determined  by  his 
location  at  certain  educational  centers  and  by  his  advocacy 
of  certain  philosophical  theories  and  educational  and 
reformatory  policies.  He  was  apparently  a  man  without 
ambition  for  place  or  power  and  one  who  shrank  from  the 
responsibility  and  routine  of  official  position.  He  refused 
to  enter  the  monastic  life  or  the  priesthood,  though  these 
were  the  avenues  to  academic  promotion.  He  declined  a 
professorship  in  early  life,  and  apparently  held  no  official 
relationship  to  the  University  of  Paris,  where  he  was  a 
prominent  figure  for  half  a  generation.  In  later  life  his 
interest  in  the  subjects  of  academic  contention  waned  and 
he  became  engrossed  in  matters  more  distinctly  religious. 
To  this  period  belong  most  of  his  surviving  writings. 

So  far  as  is  known  the  accompanying  translation  of 
three  groups  of  Wessel's  writings  is  the  first  attempt  to 
present  his  works  in  any  other  language  than  their  original 
Latin.  To  this  statement  there  is  an  interesting  exception. 
During  the  early  period  of  the  Reformation  so  much 
importance  was  attached  to  his  essay  on  the  Dignity  and 
Power  of  the  Church  and  Proper  Obedience  thereto  that 
it  was  translated  into  the  German  for  popular  distribution. 
A  few  copies  of  this  brochure  are  still  in  existence,  and 
have  apparently  come  to  light  since  Ullmann  made  his 
investigations.  A  photograph  of  the  title-page  of  one  of 
them,  given  by  Professor  Doedes  to  the  University  Library 
in  Groningen,  was  made  for  use  in  this  volume.  Besides 
the  writings  of  Wessel  which  here  appear  in  translation, 
there  are  four  other  works,  a  theological  treatise  and  three 
devotional  writings.  In  bulk  they  are  about  twice  as 
large  as  these  translated,  and  constitute  nearly  two 
thirds  of  the  thick  volume  of  921  pages  in  which  are  con- 


CHAPTER 


PAGE 


CONTENTS 

BIOGRAPHY 

I. — His  Immediate  Environment        ...        3 

II. — His  Remoter  Environment  .         .         .21 

III. — His  Youth  . 

IV. — His  Early  Manhood 


41 
59 
79 
97 
113 


V. — His  Later  Manhood 

VI. — His  Last  Years   . 

VII. — His  Personality  . 

VIII. — Wessel  as  a  Protestant      .         .         .  .128 

IX. — Wessel's  Relation  to  the  Reformation  149 

X. — The  Letters         .         .         •         .         .  .167 

XI. — The  Treatise  on  the  Eucharist          .  .187 

XII.— The  Farrago 203 

The  Translation  of  the  Letters        .  .     225 


xi{i 


ILLUSTRATIONS 


PAGE 


Wessel  Gansfort  ....  Frontispiece 

The  Gansfort  Coat  of  Arms  .         .         .         .       iii 

A  Page  from  an  Illuminated  Copy  of  the  Bible 
Made  by  the  Brethren  of  the  Common  Life  at 

ZWOLLE  during  THE  LIFETIME  OF  WeSSEL  GaNSFORT         10 

A  Plan  of  Groningen  Prior  to  the  Removal  of  its 
Walls  and  Fortifications.  In  the  Centre 
Appears  the  Compact  Mediaeval  City  ...      20 

The  Fish  Market,  Groningen.  The  Church  of  St. 
Martin  in  the  Background       ....       38 

One  of  the  Many  Gates  to  Medieval  Groningen      .      56 

The  Entrance  to  the  Convent  of  the  Spiritual 
Virgins  in  Groningen 76 

Pope  Sixtus  IV.  Holding  an  Audience  .         .       84 

From  a  painting  by  Melozzo  da  Forli,  in  the  Vatican 

A  Profile  of  Medieval  Groningen.  The  Spires  of 
the  Convent  of  the  Spiritual  Virgins  Appear 
Just  to  the  Left  of  the  Tower  of  the  Church 
OF  St.  Martin.  The  Location  of  Adwerd  is 
Indicated  at  the  Extreme  Left        ...       94 


xvi  Illustrations 


PAGE 


A  Corridor  in  the  Convent  of  the  Spiritual  Virgins 
Leading  into  the  Courtyard    .         ,         .         .no 

It  has  not  been  altered  since  Wessel  made  the  Convent  his 
home 

The  Church  of  St.  Martin,  Groningen,  in  which  the 
Bones  OF  Wessel  Gansfort  NOW  Rest  .         .         .     128 

Tablet  Marking  the  Tomb  of  Wessel  Gansfort, 
Originally  in  the  Convent  of  the  Spiritual 
Virgins,  now  in  the  Church  of  St.  Martin     .     150 

The  Title-page  of  a  German  Translation  of 
Wessel's  Essay  on  Ecclesiastical  Dignity  and 
Power,  Made  during  THE  Reformation        .         .      158 

It  is  the  only  one  of  Wessel's  writings  hitherto  translated. 
There  are  several  copies  in  existence 

The   Title-page   of   the   Completest   Edition   of 

Wessel's  Letters       .         .         .         .         .         .167 

There  is  no  indication  of  the  time  or  place  of  its  publication 

The  Title-page  of  the  Essay  on  the  Eucharist  .     1 87 

There  is  no  indication  of  the  time  or  place  of  its  publication 


Wessel  Gansfort 


Wessel  Gansfort 


CHAPTER   I 

HIS  IMMEDIATE  ENVIRONMENT 

In  the  history  of  modern  times  the  Netherlands  have 
played  a  part  out  of  all  proportion  to  their  population  and 
material  resources.  Like  ancient  Palestine  and  Greece 
they  afford  an  example  of  a  country  small  in  area  but 
large  in  influence.  Even  before  the  beginning  of  the 
modern  era  this  group  of  tiny  provinces  about  the  mouth 
of  the  Rhine  had  given  promise  of  its  future  industrial 
and  political  importance.  Its  hardy  people,  mainly  of 
Germanic  stock,  had  from  the  time  of  the  Roman  in- 
vasions shown  a  singular  love  of  freedom  and  willingness 
to  defend  it  at  any  cost.  Their  other  qualities  of  inven- 
tiveness and  patient  determination  had  doubtless  been 
developed  by  a  constant  contest  with  the  ocean,  from 
which  their  farmers  had  won  their  most  fertile  fields  and 
their  fishermen  a  large  part  of  the  nation's  wealth.  Re- 
mote and  difficult  of  access  as  were  many  parts  of  the 
Netherlands,  yet  connection  with  the  ancient  Roman 
Empire  and  its  Germanic  successor,  as  well  as  early  incor- 
poration in  the  Church  of  Rome,  had  kept  the  country  in 
the  main  currents  of  European  life. 

In  the  fifteenth  century  the  Netherlands  were  In  many 
respects  the  most  highly  developed  country  in  northern 
Europe.     Their  numerous  cities  were  hives  of  varied 

3 


4  Wessel  Gansfort 

industry  and  centers  of  international  commerce.  They 
were  also  nurseries  of  civil  liberty.  In  no  other  land 
had  agriculture  and  especially  horticulture  reached  such  a 
high  state  of  development.  In  spite  of  a  century  of  inter- 
mittent civil  conflict  and  occasional  foreign  wars  in  which 
their  ambitious  princes  had  involved  them,  their  proverbial 
industry  and  thrift  had  brought  them  great  national 
wealth  and  commercial  prosperity.  Among  all  classes  the 
standards  of  living  and  the  average  of  intelligence  were 
high.  There  were  many  good  schools  and  a  popular 
disposition  to  take  advantage  of  them.  Haarlem  disputed 
with  Mainz  the  honor  of  being  the  birthplace  of  print- 
ing, and  other  Dutch  cities  were  early  engaged  in  the 
publishing  business. 

The  political  evolution  of  the  Netherlands  from  feudal- 
ism to  a  true  national  life  had  been  interrupted  by  their 
becoming  a  part  of  the  possessions  of  the  powerful  Dukes 
of  Burgundy,  who  aimed  to  establish  a  centralized  des- 
potism in  the  place  of  the  local  self-government  and 
chartered  privilege  which  the  people  had  obtained  from 
their  earlier  feudal  masters.  The  collapse  of  Burgundian 
ambition  with  the  death  of  Charles  the  Bold  in  1477  gave 
the  Netherlands  an  opportunity  to  regain  their  lost 
liberties.  Assembled  in  their  first  national  congress,  they 
obtained  from  his  daughter  Mary,  as  the  price  of  their 
allegiance,  a  new  constitution,  the  Great  Privilege,  which 
has  been  called  the  Magna  Charta  of  the  Netherlands, 
and  was  in  a  sense  the  foundation  of  the  Dutch  Republic. 

It  is  significant  that  it  was  in  the  same  year  that  the 
Great  Privilege  was  granted  that  the  first  edition  of  the 
Bible  in  the  Dutch  language  was  issued.  This  early 
appearance  of  the  Scriptures  in  the  vernacular  can  only  be 
explained  by  a  popular  demand  for  it,  and  this  demand 
has  its  explanation  in  the  permeation  of  the  medieval 
Church  in  the  Netherlands  by  the  influence  of  a  native 


Immediate  Environment  5 

mysticism,  which  made  much  of  the  private  reading  of  the 
Scriptures  and  immediate  communion  with  God.  This 
had  brought  about  the  revival  of  a  simple  piety  which  was 
quite  independent  of  the  ministries  of  the  Church.  Doubt- 
less the  influence  of  such  teachers  as  Eckhart  and  Tauler 
had  found  its  way  down  the  Rhine  and  prepared  the  soil 
of  the  Netherlands  for  the  Brethren  of  the  Common  Life 
and  similar  organizations  among  the  laity  for  the  cultiva- 
tion of  piety.  These  movements  were  not  positively  anti- 
clerical, though  their  existence  was  an  implication  that 
the  Church  was  neglecting  her  foremost  function.  In  the 
general  features  of  its  administration  the  Church  in  the 
Netherlands  in  the  fifteenth  century  was  neither  better 
nor  worse  than  in  the  other  provinces  of  the  pope's  domain. 
It  was,  however  as  we  shall  see,  the  object  of  incessant 
criticism  even  by  some  high  in  its  official  circles. 

Nothing  is  more  indicative  of  the  intellectual  and  re- 
ligious condition  of  the  Netherlands  at  this  time  than  the 
lay  fraternity  for  the  cultivation  of  piety  and  scholarship 
known  as  the  Brethren  of  the  Common  Life.  So  far  as 
the  origin  of  this  organization  can  be  traced  to  a  single 
man,  the  honor  belongs  to  Gerhard  Groot,  who  was  born 
at  Deventer  in  1340.  But  a  generation  before  Groot, 
mystical  piety  had  its  distinguished  representative  in  the 
Netherlands  in  the  person  of  John  Ruysbroek,  priest  at 
St.  Gudula  in  Brussels,  and  later  first  prior  of  the  monas- 
tery of  Grunthal.  Apparently  he  was  a  disciple  of  Eckhart 
and  undoubtedly  a  friend  of  Tauler.  This  constitutes 
him  a  personal  link,  probably  one  of  many,  between  the 
mysticism  of  Germany  and  that  of  the  Netherlands. 
Ruysbroek,  who  contrary  to  the  custom  of  the  times  wrote 
in  the  vernacular,  has  been  accounted  the  most  effective 
Dutch  writer  of  the  Middle  Ages.  But  even  more  influen- 
tial than  his  somewhat  voluminous  writings  was  the  im- 
press which  his  pure  and  intense  religious  life  made  upon 


6  Wessel  Gansfort 

his  disciples  and  upon  the  monks  in  his  monastery.  Best 
known  among  the  former  is  Gerhard  Groot  who  fell  under 
his  influence  when  he  was  a  lad  of  seventeen,  became  one 
of  his  followers,  and  later  the  translator  of  his  writings  into 
the  Latin.  As  the  founder  of  an  educational  system,  he 
had  every  equipment  which  his  age  could  afford.  He 
studied  at  the  cathedral  school  of  his  native  town,  then  at 
the  University  of  Paris,  where,  after  the  custom  of  the 
time,  he  devoted  himself  to  a  wide  range  of  subjects 
including  "theology,  philosophy,  medicine,  canon  law, 
astronomy,  magic,  and  Hebrew."  Later  we  find  him  at 
the  universities  of  Cologne  and  Prague  and  at  the  papal 
court  of  Urban  V  at  Avignon.  A  private  fortune  and  the 
income  of  two  deaneries  had  provided  him  the  means  for  a 
rather  luxurious  Hfe.  But  when  thirty-four  years  of  age, 
a  serious  illness  became  the  occasion  of  a  deep  religious 
experience,  which  gave  a  new  direction  to  his  life.  He 
resigned  most  of  his  income,  devoted  much  of  his  time  to 
study  and  prayer,  and  for  three  years  retired  to  a  monas- 
tery. Then  began  his  brief  career  as  a  wandering  lay- 
preacher  to  the  common  people,  and  a  fearless  critic  of  the 
abuses  in  the  Church  and  in  society.  His  ministry  lasted 
less  than  four  years,  but  it  made  a  deep  impression  upon 
the  multitudes  that  everywhere  thronged  to  hear  him  and 
exerted  a  directive  influence  over  the  lives  of  a  score  or 
more  of  men  of  distinction.  Feeling  the  need  of  better 
schools,  especially  for  future  priests,  he  associated  with 
himself,  at  Deventer  and  Zwolle,  a  number  of  young  men 
and  boys  whom  he  taught,  and  encouraged  to  support 
themselves  by  the  transcription  of  religious  books  for  him. 
To  enable  his  scholars  and  teachers  to  live  more  economi- 
cally, and  doubtless  also  to  intensify  his  influence  over 
them,  he  later  arranged  to  have  them  live  together  in  one 
house  like  a  little  monastic  community,  but  without  vows 
and  with  freedom  to  come  and  go  at  will.    So  began  an 


Immediate  Environment  7 

institution  which  soon  spread  throughout  the  Netherlands 
and  extended  up  the  Rhine  into  Germany.  The  organiza- 
tion of  the  Brethren  of  the  Common  Life  was  such  as  to 
set  them  in  sharp  distinction  from  the  monks  and  the 
friars,  who  were  at  first  disposed  to  criticize  and  oppose 
them.  The  monks  looked  with  disapproval  upon  their 
exemption  from  vows  and  their  freedom  of  movement. 
The  mendicants  feared  their  influence,  for  instead  of 
identifying  piety  with  beggary,  they  made  a  point  of 
supporting  themselves  by  their  own  efforts.  As  com- 
munities of  workmen  they  naturally  excited  the  suspicion 
of  the  established  trade  guilds,  while  the  zeal  of  their 
leaders  in  preaching  to  the  common  people  raised  an  issue 
with  the  local  church  authorities.  It  was  some  years 
before  the  character  of  the  movement  was  popularly 
understood  and  the  Brethren  were  recognized  and  ap- 
proved by  the  civil  and  ecclesiastical  powers. 

All  that  Gerhard  Groot  contributed  to  the  movement 
was  its  spirit  and  general  aim.  His  death  occurred  in  1384 
when  as  yet  there  were  but  the  two  original  communi- 
ties at  Deventer  and  Zwolle,  and  everything  was  in  a 
formative  stage.  His  disciples,  notably  Florentius,  drew 
up  the  rules  and  completed  the  organization  of  the  order. 
Its  characteristic  features  may  be  thus  summarized.  The 
aim  of  the  Brethren  was  threefold:  to  cultivate  the  re- 
ligious life  among  themselves  by  what  they  called  ' '  modem 
devotion,"  to  improve  their  minds  by  serious  study,  and 
to  seek  the  betterment  of  the  Church  and  the  world. 
They  sought  to  live  a  community  life  like  that  of  the 
monks,  but  without  taking  the  ordinary  monastic  vows. 
They  rendered  voluntary  obedience  to  superiors  chosen 
by  themselves  from  their  own  number.  They  supported 
themselves  by  various  industries  carried  on  by  the  com- 
munity, and  they  especially  sought  the  edification  of 
themselves  and  others  by  the  reading  of  the  Scriptures 


8  Wessel  Gansfort 

in  the  vernacular.  The  purpose  of  the  order  is  thus  stated 
by  the  community  at  Herford:  "For  the  promotion  of 
our  souls'  salvation,  as  well  as  for  the  edification  of  our 
neighbor  in  the  purity  of  the  true  Christian  faith  and  the 
unity  of  our  Mother  the  holy  Christian  Church,  we  will  and 
intend  to  live  a  pure  life,  in  harmony  and  community,  by 
the  work  of  our  own  hands,  in  true  Christian  religion  and 
the  service  of  God.  We  purpose  to  live  a  life  of  modera- 
tion, without  beggary ;  to  render  obedience  with  reverence 
to  our  superiors;  to  wear  a  humble  and  simple  habit; 
diligently  to  observe  the  canons  of  the  holy  Fathers,  in  so 
far  as  they  are  of  profit;  diligently  to  apply  ourselves  to 
the  virtues  and  other  holy  exercises  and  studies;  and  not 
alone  to  live  a  blameless  life,  but  to  give  a  good  pattern 
and  example  to  other  men." 

The  usual  community  of  the  Brethren  consisted  of 
twenty  inmates  of  three  classes:  priests  and  candidates 
for  the  priesthood,  laymen,  and  probationers  for  member- 
ship. The  spiritual  and  ecclesiastical  functions  were 
naturally  discharged  by  the  first  class.  The  lay  brothers, 
who  constituted  most  of  the  membership,  carried  "on  the 
various  industries  of  the  community.  The  period  of. 
probation  was  brief,  varying  from  two  months  to  a  year. 
On  entering  the  brotherhood,  one  might  retain  his  prop- 
erty or  dispose  of  it  as  he  chose,  but  if  he  donated  it  to  the 
house  he  could  not  recover  it  in  case  he  left.  Although 
one  of  the  characteristics  of  the  Brethren  was  their  free 
intercourse  with  society,  yet  they  had  a  simple  uniform 
which  distinguished  them  from  their  fellows.  This  was  not 
strange  since  even  the  trade  guilds  had  each  its  own  regalia. 
The  habit  of  the  Brethren  consisted  of  a  simple  outer  gar- 
ment of  black  or  gray  linen.  In  the  case  of  the  clerics  it 
reached  to  the  ground,  for  the  laymen  it  was  shorter. 
Their  undergarments  were  also  of  rough  linen.  In  cold 
weather  a  bluish-gray  cloak  with  a  black  hood  was  worn. 


Immediate  Environment  9 

The  popular  names  given  them  in  different  places  are 
suggestive  of  the  esteem  in  which  the  Brethren  were  held. 
Where  their  schools  were  prominent  they  were  called 
"School  Brothers,"  or  "Brothers  of  the  Pen"  from  their 
devotion  to  transcription,  or  "Apostolic  Brothers"  from 
their  imitation  of  the  communistic  example  of  the  Apostles, 
or  "Fratres  CoUationum"  from  the  fact  that  they  gave 
plain  and  familiar  talks  to  the  people  rather  than  formal 
sermons.  The  name  "LoUard"  was  sometimes  given 
them  by  their  enemies. 

At  the  head  of  each  house  was  a  rector,  chosen  by  the 
community,  usually  from  its  own  membership.  Each 
member  pledged  obedience  to  him  and  without  his  consent 
did  not  leave  the  house.  Next  in  importance  to  the  rector 
was  the  procurator  who  had  charge  of  all  the  relations  of 
the  community  to  the  outside  world.  A  conspicuous 
officer  was  the  librarian,  whose  work  consisted  not  so 
much  in  the  care  of  the  books  belonging  to  the  house  as 
in  the  supervision  of  the  copying  of  the  Scriptures  and 
other  religious  books,  which  formed  an  important  part 
of  their  industries.  As  in  the  case  of  the  monastic  orders 
there  was  a  cellarer  and  a  cook  and  a  gardener  and  a 
nurse,  and  to  assist  them  in  their  worship  a  sacristan  and 
precentor.  Each  hour  of  the  day  had  its  appointed  em- 
ployment; in  which  the  conduct  of  the  school  had  an 
important  place. 

But  the  most  distinctive  feature  of  the  brotherhood  was 
its  constant  emphasis  on  what  it  called  "modern  devo- 
tion." There  is  in  this  term  an  implied  contrast,  doubtless, 
between  the  active  life  of  the  Brethren,  in  which  study  and 
work  and  conference  were  the  chief  means  of  developing 
the  religious  life,  and  the  passive,  dreamy  devotions  so 
characteristic  of  monasticism.  It  was  believed  that  every 
task  could  be  entered  upon  in  the  spirit  of  devotion  and 
be  made  a  means  of  communion  with  God  and  an  aid  to 


10  Wessel  Gansfort 

the  development  of  the  spiritual  life.  While  much  was 
made  of  the  monastic  virtues  of  obedience  and  the  con- 
quest of  pride  and  self-will  and  the  disregard  of  worldly 
and  temporal  things,  yet  a  due  balance  was  maintained 
by  great  emphasis  upon  work  and  study  and  a  knowledge 
of  the  Scriptures  and  a  concern  for  the  welfare  of  the 
outside  world. 

This  combination  of  the  active  and  the  contemplative 
saved  the  Brethren  from  the  excessive  asceticism  which 
marred  the  life  even  of  that  consummate  flower  of  mon- 
asticism,  Bernard  of  Clairvaux.  Luxurious  the  life  of  the 
Brethren  could  never  have  been.  Not  being  permitted  to 
beg,  they  were  shut  off  from  a  source  of  revenue  which 
often  rendered  the  mendicants  rich ;  while  their  early  rising, 
their  long  hours  of  work  or  study,  their  simple  dress  and 
food,  all  conspired  to  save  them  from  the  self-indulgence 
which  had  become  the  scandal  of  monasticism.  On  the 
other  hand,  there  was  nothing  essentially  ascetic  in  the 
principles  of  the  order.  Industry  in  study  and  work  were 
cardinal  virtues  with  which  the  crucifixion  of  the  flesh 
seriously  interfered.  Although  fasting  and  the  wearing  of 
a  hair  shirt  were  not  absolutely  prohibited,  they  were  not 
encouraged,  and  to  those  whose  health  was  endangered 
by  them  they  were  forbidden.  But  doubtless  the  chief 
deterrent  from  a  reliance  upon  mechanical  aids  to  sancti- 
fication  was  the  constant  emphasis  placed  upon  the 
knowledge  of  the  Scriptures  as  the  foremost  means  of 
grace.  The  fresh  hours  of  the  morning  were  set  aside  to 
Bible  study,  and  each  day  of  the  week  had  its  appointed 
biblical  theme  as  the  subject  of  special  meditation.  And 
besides  this,  the  Scriptures  were  alwaj^s  foremost  among 
the  manuscripts  wrought  upon  with  loving  care  in  the 
quiet  labors  of  the  scriptorium. 

Second  only  to  the  interest  of  the  Brethren  in  the 
promotion  of  personal  piety,  and  regarded  as  one  of  the 


jllH^'IfS,^^  i  0|T>"7g^f8  7rl  1  ■  -J 


anpUsiiJtmerar 

mmniQ)JO0aitf:quafi  ^ 
^  ^gmrnisfrmmimnoam  , 
■c^t  |]  miU6  fif.ffOnl  aurtrwf 

'^  rDmonf  fcpnuigmm 
^^^[;,  rotnflanK/oUmfrgtT 


x>: 


'"'^^i 


no  flnmmm  mUmffr 


maUWiri.wwD.morti. 
matufa!f.ldmrrii:nor. 


mfnonnsrummmim 

Itfjrrf rihmanfJKuquo^  '?*•  fmt.rtmm  ff iapnrti).fi  .^ 
.■  '^ m ronumni framl fan  ,'  ^ luiapiirtti.gtjmfr.ma    i^^* 
t/MlJfOiflfro.a^nrfnunf  w  gT)g;mami.mauan.m 
4  iiamflaiuuuDril-unuaVo  uannoforti.nm6.po2 
?^^  linmlmmpifmmafu:  .,  roftuigt)mfr:a(riimr2 
"  '     Umwofrn.ufincrmm  ^>  rrnpiiar.fftogmmaft 
uaremoni8(rfauani 


H  noniuniriutfmiJroia 


:^^^y- 


r, 


n)nfnfafmifumo.fai 
fmltpUiirtjanmiapn: 
ausrriJurrfuaroiain 

igrmtinifmirinmmpfi 
frmasmrmmOnmul 

imnnwrtauiTOfurtri!'* 

^  mtrmmn. 
.<J^vetpuafp2rfano...- 

a£  f  nnpif  UUfr  rab:n»ann 
%  14  iD  (ftj^lipommo  pnil 


Uiautnniaaan:i)riira 
,  rrrtiarfis.mtfnni.rrft)  1**^ 

ranun.mu  riiam*rt)U0  ^^: 

frniffraun.pOarii.rfdiii 
,  naan.riaiautfrtin0:(ii  ^  >^  >x.    - 

uaftmua.fauartiafr  yfoi>,^\r 

mfmna.ttfaliatuartia. 

poiroruutTflmnaifai) 

>  ua.fr mijmn.Omsau 
mn  pnnrnmirotiK 
iarfq«rf(rfpomi5m 

>  ttrra.mrfrannofrogt  fi 
nuit  uUJun  rrananum.jil  ^; 


j-'-vJl^^: 


j-t/v**  r 


??(->.-  i-' 


A  Page  from  an  Illuminated  Copy  of  the  Bible  Made  by  the  Brethren  of  the 
Common  Life  at  Zwolle  during  the  Lifetime  of  Wessel  Gansfort 


Immediate  Environment  ii 

chief  means  thereto,  was  their  activity  in  Christian 
education.  This  was  manifest  from  the  beginning.  Nearly 
every  community  conducted  a  school.  But  where  this 
was  not  feasible,  the  Brethren  aided  existing  schools  by 
providing  them  with  teachers  for  certain  classes,  or  by 
giving  books  to  the  scholars,  or  by  offering  board  and 
lodging  and  employment  to  needy  students,  or  by  en- 
couraging wealthy  men  to  make  provision  for  them. 
Some  of  their  own  schools  were  largely  attended,  as  at 
Hertogenbosch  where  there  were  at  one  time  over  a 
thousand  pupils;  and  everywhere  they  were  active  in 
promoting  education.  No  doubt  the  course  of  instruction 
in  their  schools  was  somewhat  one-sided,  as  is  likely  to 
be  the  case  still  in  such  institutions.  It  excluded  much 
that  we  would  regard  as  essential,  and  placed  great 
emphasis  upon  the  cultivation  of  religion.  The  character 
of  the  religious  training  given  is  indicated  by  this  signifi- 
cant statement  of  Gerhard  Groot:  "Let  the  root  of  thy 
studies  and  the  mirror  of  thy  life  be,  first  of  all,  the  Gospel, 
for  in  it  is  contained  the  life  of  Christ ;  next  the  biographies 
and  sayings  of  the  Fathers;  afterwards  the  Epistles  of  Paul 
and  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles;  and  finally  the  devotional 
works  of  Bernard,  Anselm,  Augustine,  and  others."  A 
course  of  religious  instruction  which  was  so  centered  about 
the  person  and  teachings  of  our  Lord  and  the  life  of  the 
primitive  Church  could  not  but  develop  a  practical  and 
evangelical  type  of  piety  in  the  youthful  pupil.  The  spirit 
of  freedom  in  which  this  religious  instruction  was  given 
may  be  inferred  from  an  utterance  of  Groot,  quoted  by 
Thomas  a  Kempis,  which  appears  to  have  been  one  of  the 
maxims  of  the  brotherhood.  It  is  to  the  effect  that  "free- 
dom of  the  mind  is  the  chief  blessing  of  the  spiritual  life." 
It  is  difficult  to  estimate  the  influence  of  a  movement 
like  this,  especially  as  from  the  first  it  comprised  institu- 
tions for  women  and  girls  as  well  as  for  men  and  boys. 


12  Wessel  Gansfort 

Its  communities  multiplied  rapidly  in  the  fifteenth  cen- 
tury, and  were  not  confined  to  the  Netherlands  but 
extended  as  far  into  Germany  as  Saxony.  Everywhere 
they  encouraged  education,  multiplied  copies  of  the 
Scripture  and  other  works  of  devotion  and  distributed 
them  widely,  trained  the  youth  of  both  sexes  in  practical 
piety,  preached  a  gospel  of  evangelical  simplicity,  and  set 
a  wholesome  example  of  industry  and  unselfishness.  And 
this  they  did  under  the  impulse  of  a  mystical  piety  sus- 
tained by  study  of  the  Bible  and  immediate  communion 
with  God. 

The  Brethren  of  the  Common  Life  have  been  noticed 
thus  at  length  for  two  reasons.  In  the  first  place,  they 
afford  the  best  illustration  of  certain  non-ecclesiastical 
forces  which  in  the  fifteenth  century  were  operating  to 
improve  the  religious  life  of  the  Netherlands.  The  effort 
at  reform  in  some  of  the  monastic  establishments  offers 
another  illustration.  Together  they  were  preparing  the 
country  for  the  Protestant  Reformation  of  the  next 
century.  The  general  intelligence  of  the  people,  their 
possession  of  the  Bible  in  their  own  language,  and  their 
acquaintance  with  a  mystical  type  of  religion  somewhat 
independent  of  the  Church  had  the  double  effect  of  saving 
the  Humanism  of  the  Netherlands  from  the  skepticism  to 
which  it  was  everywhere  exposed,  and  of  predisposing  the 
people  to  accept  Protestant  doctrine  and  withdraw  from 
the  Church  of  Rome.  The  Reformation  movement  in 
the  Netherlands  was  to  pass  through  three  phases.  It  was 
first  Anabaptist,  then  Lutheran,  and  finally  Calvinistic. 
And  the  strength  and  persistence  of  the  Anabaptists  who 
represent  the  native  type  of  Protestantism,  popular  and 
based  upon  a  literal  and  naive  interpretation  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, indicate  how  largely  the  common  people  had  been 
leavened  with  the  ideas  for  which  the  Brethren  stood. 
And  while  the  Anabaptists  sometimes  ran  into  fanaticism 


Immediate  Environment  13 

and  violence  as  at  Minister,  on  the  whole  they  came  nearer 
reproducing  primitive  Christianity  than  did  the  maturer 
and  sophisticated  types  of  Protestantism.  It  was  against 
them  that  nearly  all  the  severe  placards  of  Charles  V  were 
directed,  and  most  of  the  early  Dutch  martyrs  to  the 
Protestant  faith  were  drawn  from  their  humble  ranks. 

But  beside  being  a  large  factor  in  the  religious  life  of 
the  Netherlands  in  the  fifteenth  century,  the  Brethren 
exerted  a  direct  influence  in  shaping  the  early  career  of  the 
subject  of  our  study.  They  not  only  assisted  in  forming 
his  intellectual  and  religious  environment,  but  they  helped 
to  form  him.  In  Groningen,  which  was  Wessel's  birth- 
place, the  Brethren  had  one  of  their  most  popular  schools. 
It  was  here  that  his  education  began,  and  it  was  continued 
in  the  more  famous  school  of  the  brotherhood  at  Zwolle. 
The  training  and  the  atmosphere  of  the  schools  conducted 
by  the  Brethren  gave  a  decided  bent  to  their  pupils.  It  is 
by  no  accident  that  the  three  best-known  religious  writers 
of  the  Netherlands  in  this  century,  Thomas  a  Kempis, 
Wessel,  and  Erasmus,  besides  Alexander  Hegius  the 
greatest  educational  reformer  of  his  age,  and  scores  of  men 
of  lesser  note,  should  have  been  under  the  instruction  of 
the  Brethren  of  the  Common  Life. 

It  is  a  notable  fact  that  nearly  all  the  movements 
toward  the  betterment  of  the  Church  and  society  during 
the  Middle  Ages  took  the  form  of  monastic  orders.  The 
natural  thing  for  a  reformer  to  do  was  to  found  a  brother- 
hood. But  it  is  interesting  to  observe  that  when  the  Church 
undertook  to  reform  herself  in  the  fifteenth  century,  the 
monasteries  themselves  were  found  to  be  most  in  need  of 
reformation.  This  was  as  true  in  the  Netherlands  as 
elsewhere.  The  picture  which  Erasmus  paints  of  the 
stupidity  and  idleness  and  self-indulgence  of  the  monks  is 
more  in  the  nature  of  a  photograph  than  a  caricature. 
Wessel  and  other  earnest  writers  bring  the  same  indict- 


14  Wessel  Gansfort 

ments.  And  this  does  not  mean  that  efforts  were  not  being 
made  to  improve  the  condition  of  convent  life.  Gerhard 
Groot  had  also  founded  a  model  monastery  at  Windesheim 
near  ZwoUe.  It  was  designed  to  set  a  new  standard  for 
monastic  life,  industrious,  and  scholarly,  and  strict  in 
discipline.  The  response  to  this  challenge  is  best  shown  in 
the  fact  that  for  the  next  two  generations  new  monastic 
houses  associated  with  Windesheim  were  built  at  the  rate 
of  one  each  year.  It  may  have  been  this  rapid  growth  of  a 
rival  brotherhood  that  stirred  up  the  older  orders  repre- 
sented in  the  Netherlands  to  an  amendment  of  life.  Deter- 
mined efforts  along  this  line  were  made  by  the  Franciscans, 
the  Benedictines,  and  the  Cistercians;  while  a  reform 
movement  among  the  Dominicans,  known  as  "the  Hol- 
land Congregation,"  redeemed  the  reputation  of  that 
fraternity  in  the  northern  provinces.  But  by  the  fifteenth 
century  monasticism  was  largely  a  spent  force,  and  all 
these  attempts  at  self-reform,  even  though  reinforced  by 
the  assistance  of  a  papal  legate,  as  was  sometimes  the 
case,  wrought  jnly  temporary  improvement.  Even  the 
model  house'  of  the  Windesheim  connection  underwent 
deterioration  after  the  second  generation.  The  obscurant- 
ist attitude  of  the  monks  is  illustrated  by  the  fact  that  at 
the  Council  of  Constance,  it  was  they  who  attempted  to 
secure  official  condemnation  of  the  Brethren  of  the  Com- 
mon Life.  Fortunately  there  were  disciples  of  Gerhard 
Groot  present  to  defend  them. 

Wessel  has  much  to  say  in  criticism  of  the  Church  of  his 
day  and  doubtless  his  strictures  are  intended  to  apply 
primarily  to  the  ecclesiastical  situation  in  his  native  Neth- 
erlands where  he  spent  most  of  his  life.  It  is  to  be  remem- 
bered that  criticism  of  the  Church  in  the  fifteenth  century 
did  not  imply  disloyalty  to  her.  Her  most  loyal  sons  were 
her  severest  critics.  It  was  just  as  it  is  in  Protestantism 
to-day.    Those  most  interested  in  the  welfare  of  the  Church 


Immediate  Environment  15 

are  those  most  conscious  of  her  defects  and  most  Insistent 
upon  her  betterment.  The  important  difference  between 
these  fifteenth-century  critics  of  the  Church  and  the 
reformers  of  the  next  century  Hes  in  the  fact  that  the 
former  never  dreamed  of  separation  from  the  Mother 
Church  while  the  latter  ventured  upon  that  course,  when 
they  found  their  reform  measures  stubbornly  opposed  by 
most  of  the  Church's  high  officials.  It  is  not  fearless 
criticism  of  ecclesiastical  abuses  that  constitutes  Wessel  a 
forerunner  of  Luther.  That  has  been  a  common  thing 
among  loyal  Catholics  in  every  period  of  the  Church's 
decadence  and  inefficiency.  It  is  rather  in  his  theological 
teachings  and  conception  of  ecclesiastical  authority  that 
he  anticipated  Luther. 

And  yet  it  is  not  improbable  that  as  in  Luther's  case 
exasperation  over  what  seemed  to  be  the  hopeless  condi- 
tion of  the  Church  may  have  rendered  him  more  radical  in 
his  theological  opinions  than  he  would  otherwise  have  been. 
And  there  is  abundant  evidence  of  the  maladministration 
of  the  Church  in  the  Netherlands  in  the  fifteenth  century. 
This  was  doubtless  due  in  part  to  the  peculiar  arrange- 
ment of  the  dioceses,  an  inheritance  from  an  earlier  period. 
The  territories  of  the  bishops  did  not  correspond  with 
those  of  the  political  provinces.  The  people  of  the  Nether- 
lands were  beginning  to  have  a  sense  of  national  unity; 
they  felt  that  they  belonged  to  one  country.  But  the 
ecclesiastical  divisions  were  still  those  made  centuries 
before  when  their  territory  was  simply  a  part  of  the  Holy 
Roman  Empire.  They  had  no  relation  to  the  present 
provincial  areas  or  the  boundaries  of  Germany  or  France. 
Four  German  bishops  ruled  large  areas  in  the  northern 
part  of  the  country,  and  six  bishops,  none  of  them  belong- 
ing to  the  Netherlands,  claimed  each  a  part  of  one  of  the 
southern  provinces.  The  situation  was  anomalous  and 
made  efficiency  in  administration  well-nigh  impossible. 


1 6  Wessel  Gansfort 

Philip  II  brought  about  a  redivision  of  the  territory,  the 
creation  of  new  dioceses  and  archdioceses.  This  emanci- 
pated the  CathoHcs  of  the  Netherlands  from  the  rule  of 
foreign  archbishops.  As  it  was,  every  political  movement 
was  subject  to  complications  from  the  fact  that  so  much 
of  the  country  owed  spiritual  allegiance  to  a  foreign 
archbishop. 

By  far  the  most  influential  of  the  native  bishops  were 
those  of  Utrecht.  Groningen  was  in  the  northeastern  part 
of  their  domain.  Wessel  lived  many  years  under  their 
rule  and  counted  one  of  them  at  least  among  his  personal 
friends.  These  bishops  were  temporal  princes  with  rich 
revenues  and  a  feudal  army.  Their  interests  were  mainly 
political  or  military,  and  their  position  was  one  coveted 
by  the  ambitious,  and  occupied  often  by  men  whose  chief 
qualification  for  it  was  their  subserviency  to  some  secular 
prince  or  political  party.  The  bishop  not  infrequently 
turned  general,  and  led  his  army  in  the  field.  It  may  have 
been  his  example  that  encouraged  some  of  the  Dutch 
abbots  to  don  armor  and  marshal  their  monks  in  battle. 
It  was  an  age  when  almost  everybody  bore  arms. 

Of  course,  there  were  occasionally  good  bishops  like 
John  of  Arkel,  who  a  half  century  before  the  time  of 
Wessel  called  synods,  instituted  many  reforms,  built 
churches  and  convents,  founded  libraries,  and  encouraged 
scholarship.  Of  a  similar  spirit  was  Frederick  of  Blanken- 
heim  whose  long  episcopate  ended  in  1423.  He  was  de- 
scribed as  "the  father  of  the  faithful  and  the  friend  of 
the  pious."  But  that  such  a  role  was  beset  by  many 
difficulties  is  indicated  by  his  death-bed  complaint  "that 
everyone  wished  to  rule  and  none  to  obey."  When  it 
came  to  the  appointing  of  his  successor  the  nobles  and  the 
chief  cities  of  the  diocese  had  one  candidate  and  Pope 
Martin  V  another;  and  the  papal  candidate  by  means  of 
liberal  bribes  secured  the  coveted  position.     The  pro- 


Immediate  Environment  17 

meters  of  his  rival  were  not  to  be  thwarted,  and  they  also 
declared  their  candidate  elected.  So  arose  the  disastrous 
schism  of  Utrecht  which  lasted  a  quarter  of  a  century  and 
involved  the  country  in  a  most  demoralizing  conflict. 
Such  was  the  situation  in  his  home  diocese  during  Wessel's 
youth  and  young  manhood.  And  it  cannot  be  said  to  have 
been  much  improved  when  later  the  Burgundian  Duke 
Philip,  in  spite  of  the  regular  election  of  another  and 
altogether  suitable  man,  claimed  the  position  for  his 
bastard  son,  and  made  good  his  claim  with  abundant 
bribes  and  an  army  of  invasion.  It  is  not  difficult  to 
estimate  the  spiritual  influence  of  such  a  bishop,  even 
though  a  dispensation  for  his  illegitimate  birth  was  pur- 
chased from  the  pope.  The  administration  of  his  high 
office  was  purely  political.  Fat  benefices  were  given  to  the 
younger  sons  of  influential  noble  families  without  much 
consideration  for  their  fitness.  Pluralities  were  permitted 
and  important  positions  were  bestowed  upon  minors. 
The  traffic  in  indulgences  was  not  interfered  with,  al- 
though it  was  meeting  the  criticism  of  men  like  Ruysbroek, 
who  complained  that  money  was  being  made  "the  penance 
and  penalty  for  all  sins."  With  ecclesiastical  superiors 
appointed  by  political  influence  and  living  in  luxury  and 
sometimes  in  license,  it  was  not  strange  that  the  lower 
clergy  should  neglect  their  duties  and  fall  into  loose  ways. 
A  modern  Dutch  historian  has  thus  summarized  the 
situation — quoting  in  part  from  an  earlier  writer :  * '  There 
were  many  priests  who  'fought  like  knights  instead  of 
teaching  the  gospel  like  clergy.  They  cared  for  them- 
selves and  their  steeds,  but  tossed  their  books  aside,  and 
did  not  shame  to  load  their  fingers  with  rings.  Dice, 
gaming,  and  reveling  till  late  at  night  were  their  chosen 
occupations.'  The  extortions  of  which  the  pastors  were 
guilty,  the  unchaste  lives  which  they  led  with  their  con- 
cubines,   the   intoxication   which   had   become   habitual 


1 8  Wessel  Gansfort 

among  the  clergy,  their  ignorance  and  their  covetousness 
— all  this  is  ample  testimony  that  the  Netherland  clergy 
were  not  better  than  their  contemporaries  in  their  manner 
of  life." 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  demoralized  condition 
of  the  Church  in  the  Netherlands  at  this  time  was  largely 
due  to  the  political  struggles  through  which  the  nation  was 
passing.  It  was  a  period  of  social  upheaval  and  inter- 
mittent civil  war.  As  elsewhere  in  northern  Europe  the 
old  feudal  constitution  of  society  was  breaking  up  under 
the  impact  of  forces  that  made  for  larger  popular  liberty 
and  increased  privileges  for  the  industrial  classes.  The 
century-long  strife  between  the  Cods  and  the  Hooks — 
resembling  at  so  many  points  the  conflict  of  parties  in 
Italian  cities — was  at  bottom  a  contest  between  the 
common  people  and  their  allies  and  the  representatives  of 
hereditary  privilege.  However  disastrous  the  immediate 
results  of  this  class-combat  were,  they  must  be  accounted 
a  part  of  the  not-too-great  price  that  the  Dutch  people 
paid  for  popular  liberty. 

But  as  has  already  been  intimated,  the  political  evolu- 
tion of  the  Netherlands  was  interrupted  by  the  territorial 
ambitions  of  the  dukes  of  Burgundy.  This  duchy  the 
French  king  gave  to  his  youngest  son,  Philip,  in  1363  as  a 
reward  for  his  brave  protection  of  his  father  at  the  battle 
of  Poitiers.  The  gift  had  altogether  unexpected  conse- 
quences, for  the  descendants  of  Philip  were  so  to  enlarge 
their  territories  and  exalt  their  ambitions  that  they  became 
rivals  of  the  French  kings  and  even  of  the  emperors.  The 
connection  of  these  Burgundian  dukes  with  the  Nether- 
lands began  with  the  marriage  of  Philip  to  the  countess  of 
Flanders  in  1384.  This  alliance  ultimately  gave  the  Bur- 
gundian duke  large  holdings  in  the  southern  provinces  of 
the  Netherlands  and  adjacent  lands,  as  well  as  territories 
joining  his  dukedom  both  on  the  east  and  west.    With  the 


Immediate  Environment  19 

acquisition  of  these  rich  lands,  which  he  held  in  feudal 
allegiance  to  the  French  king  on  the  one  hand  and  to  the 
German  emperor  on  the  other,  Philip  began  a  policy  of 
Burgundian  aggression  which  his  successors  for  nearly  a 
century  were  to  pursue  with  singular  success.  His  grand- 
son, who  bears  the  misleading  title  Philip  the  Good, 
contrived  to  extend  his  authority  over  practically  all  of  the 
Netherlands,  and  over  many  neighboring  provinces.  He 
was  an  independent  king  in  everything  but  name,  and 
formed  alliances  or  engaged  in  war  with  the  surrounding 
monarchs,  as  if  he  were  their  peer. 

Philip  began  his  rule  in  14 19,  the  year  in  which  Wessel 
was  born,  and  for  nearly  fifty  years  he  directed  the  for- 
tunes of  the  Netherlands,  not  so  much  in  their  own  inter- 
ests as  in  those  of  his  soaring  ambitions.  Besides  involving 
his  Dutch  subjects  in  wars  with  England  and  France  in 
which  they  had  no  interest,  he  imposed  new  and  heavy 
taxes  upon  them,  often  disregarded  their  hereditary 
liberties,  and  interfered  with  their  commerce.  Frequent 
revolts  arose  in  consequence,  and  at  one  time  or  another 
Philip  had  occasion  to  appear  with  an  army  in  almost 
every  one  of  his  Dutch  provinces.  Sometimes,  as  in  the 
revolt  of  Ghent,  he  visited  terrific  vengeance  upon  his 
rebellious  subjects. 

The  most  beneficial  effect  of  Burgundian  rule  in  the 
Netherlands  was  its  tendency  to  unify  the  diverse  and 
sometimes  mutually  jealous  provinces,  and  to  give  greater 
uniformity  to  their  provincial  governments.  This  was  the 
result  of  the  strong  centralized  authority  of  the  dukes,  and 
their  successful  resistance  of  the  centrifugal  tendency  in 
the  old  feudal  constitution  of  society.  This  hard  pressure 
of  external  authority  may  have  hastened  the  cohesion  of 
the  provinces  into  conscious  national  unity,  even  as  the 
unwise  assertion  of  authority  by  the  English  government 
in  the  matter  of  taxation  and  commerce  developed  in  the 


20  Wessel  Gansfort 

American  colonies  a  new  sense  of  their  common  interest. 
If  this  was  the  case,  it  was  in  the  nature  of  a  com- 
pensation for  the  interference  of  the  Burgundians  with  the 
normal  political  and  social  evolution  of  their  Dutch  sub- 
jects. It  is  characteristic  of  the  patient  persistence  of  the 
Netherlanders  that  they  should  have  seized  upon  every 
opportunity  afforded  by  the  financial  straits  or  other  em- 
barrassments of  their  Burgundian  rulers  to  exact  from 
them,  as  the  price  of  their  grants  of  new  money  or  soldiers, 
the  restoration  or  extension  of  their  liberties.  And  when  in 
1477  Burgundian  dreams  of  empire  came  to  such  a  sudden 
end  in  the  defeat  and  death  of  Charles  the  Bold,  the  repre- 
sentatives of  provinces  that  the  dukes  had  often  played 
off  against  one  another  met  in  the  States  General  at  Ghent 
and  demanded  a  new  charter  that  should  restore  and 
enlarge  their  ancient  liberties.  When  this  was  granted 
they  were  ready  with  men  and  money  to  protect  the  young 
duchess,  and  drive  back  the  French  troops  on  the  Flemish 
borders. 

So  far  as  it  affects  our  subject  such  in  barest  outline  was 
the  condition  of  the  Netherlands,  during  the  fifteenth 
century.  It  was  a  period  of  intellectual  and  industrial 
activity  and  of  prosperity  in  spite  of  civil  strife  and  politi- 
cal contentions.  The  Church  was  badly  administered,  the 
monasteries  had  fallen  into  decline,  but  there  were  many 
wholesome  influences,  educational  and  religious,  which 
combined  to  make  such  a  life  as  that  of  Wessel  Gansfort 
possible. 


CHAPTER  II 

HIS  REMOTER  ENVIRONMENT 

With  the  development  of  the  universities  in  the  latter 
part  of  the  Middle  Ages  there  appeared  a  new  type  of 
scholar.  He  was  intellectually  a  cosmopolite.  The  hori- 
zon of  the  medieval  man  had  been  narrow  and  his  interests 
largely  provincial.  Even  his  scholarship  had  been  in  a 
sense  local.  Until  Abelard,  there  were  no  teachers  or 
schools  of  international  distinction.  But  the  impulse 
which  he  gave  to  education  and  the  awakening  intellectual 
life  of  Europe  resulted  in  the  organization,  during  the 
thirteenth  and  fourteenth  centuries,  of  many  institutions 
in  whose  teaching  force  or  student  body  there  were  repre- 
sentatives of  every  Christian  land.  As  there  was  but  one 
language  of  instruction,  teachers  and  students  moved 
readily,  even  more  freely  than  they  do  to-day,  from  one 
university  to  another.  This  movement  from  school  to 
school,  and  this  free  intercourse  between  students  from 
different  regions  resulted  in  the  development  of  a.  broader 
scholarship,  cosmopolitan  in  outlook.  The  later  medieval 
scholar  was,  in  intellectual  sympathies,  a  citizen  of  the 
world.  This  was  especially  true  of  those  early  humanistic 
scholars  of  whom  Wessel  is  representative.  They  were 
the  product  of  no  one  land ;  and  they  did  their  work  with 
the  consciousness  of  what  was  being  thought  and  done 
in  other  parts  of  the  world. 

Their  world  was  Europe  and  those  parts  of  Asia  and 
Africa  known  to  the  ancients.    But  not  least  among  the 

21 


22  Wessel  Gansfort 

great  accomplishments  of  the  fifteenth  century  was  the 
sudden  expansion  of  this  narrow  world.  It  was  the  Age 
of  Discovery.  Two  continents,  Africa  and  America,  were 
added  to  the  map.  After  more  than  a  half  century  of 
gradual  approach  Portuguese  explorers  in  i486  reached 
and  passed  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope.  The  progress  of  their 
exploration  had  been  followed  with  the  keenest  interest 
in  every  educated  circle  in  Europe.  Upon  their  fortunate 
culmination,  the  foremost  Humanist  of  Italy,  Politian  of 
Florence,  congratulated  the  Portuguese  king  upon  having 
restored  a  continent  to  the  knowledge  of  mankind,  and 
upon  having  become  the  guardian  of  a  second  world, 
"Mundus  Alter." 

These  explorations  on  the  African  coast  had  revived 
interest  everywhere  in  the  possibility  of  reaching  India 
by  a  western  course.  The  more  adventurous  sailors  of 
every  maritime  nation  were  dreaming  of  it,  encouraged  by 
their  ambitious  monarchs.  Columbus  was  only  one — the 
most  logical  and  determined  and  fortunate — of  a  group  of 
brave  explorers  whose  eyes  were  fixed  upon  the  western 
horizon.  America,  in  any  case,  could  not  have  much 
longer  remained  hidden  from  the  knowledge  of  expectant 
Europe. 

It  is  significant  that  almost  contemporaneously  with 
this  broadening  of  the  geographical  horizon  of  all  educated 
men,  there  occurred  also  the  expansion  of  their  universe. 
Cardinal  Cusa,  who  was  nearly  two  decades  older  than 
Wessel,  ventured  the  opinion  that  the  earth  revolved ;  and 
Copernicus,  who  was  nearly  a  half  century  younger,  gave 
wide  currency  to  this  view  and  to  the  others  that  constitute 
his  system.  But  it  proved  much  easier  for  men  to  admit 
new  continents  to  their  thought  than  to  shift  the  theoretic 
center  of  things  from  the  earth  to  the  sun.  That  proved 
too  difficult  even  for  Luther,  who  said  that  it  was  for- 
bidden both  by  Scripture  and  common  sense ! 


Remoter  Environment  23 

But  more  influential  than  the  appearance  of  a  new 
cosmic  theory  or  the  emergence  of  new  continents,  in 
shaping  the  thought  of  the  fifteenth  century,  was  the 
gradual  discovery  of  the  Ancient  World,  the  classic 
civilization.  This  gave  everything  in  life  a  new  perspec- 
tive, and  presented  it  with  a  new  criterion. 

Two  conceptions  had  dominated  the  thought  of  the 
Middle  Ages:  that  of  a  Universal  Church,  and  that  of  a 
Universal  Empire.  These  were  the  divinely  appointed 
institutions  within  which  a  man  must  establish  his  tem- 
poral and  spiritual  relationships.  Outside  these  were 
barbarism,  and  political  chaos,  and  perdition.  Augustine 
had  given  currency  to  the  idea  that  the  Roman  Empire 
and  the  Catholic  Church  had  been  ordained  of  God  as  his 
permanent  agencies  for  the  government  and  the  salvation 
of  men;  and  it  had  become  the  fundamental  hypothesis 
that  underlay  all  the  political  and  religious  thinking  of  the 
Middle  Ages. 

It  did  not  seriously  disturb  the  scholastic  theorists  that 
the  Holy  Roman  Empire  no  longer  contained  all  the 
Christian  states  of  Europe,  and  that  the  entire  oriental 
half  of  Christendom  refused  allegiance  to  the  head  of  the 
Holy  Roman  Church.  These  were  merely  infelicitous 
facts,  to  which  the  time-honored  theory  was  not  expected 
to  yield.  Deliverance  from  the  intellectual  and  spiritual 
tryanny  imposed  by  this  obsolete  hypothesis  was  to  arise 
from  another  quarter.  Conceptions  that  had  withstood 
the  contradiction  of  obvious  present  facts  yielded  to  a 
denial  from  the  remote  past.  The  Renaissance  was  coin- 
cident with  the  recovered  knowledge  of  the  literature  and 
art  of  classic  Greece  and  Rome.  Men  who  had  been 
taught  to  believe  that  everything  that  was  worthy  in 
human  life  depended  upon  one's  relation  to  the  Holy 
Roman  Church  and  Empire  discovered  that  centuries 
before  the  existence  of  the  Church  or  the  Empire  men  had 


24  Wessel  Gansfort 

wrought  most  noble  achievements  in  character  and 
government  and  philosophy  and  literature  and  art.  These 
men  of  the  classic  age  were  seen  to  have  enjoyed  a  freedom 
of  speculation,  a  love  of  beauty,  and  a  simple  joy  in  life, 
that  the  medieval  man,  hemmed  in  by  the  restraints  of  the 
Church  and  haunted  by  its  supernaturalism,  could  not 
but  regard  with  impatient  envy.  The  classic  sages  and 
seers  and  heroes,  the  nobler  emperors  and  Plutarch's  men, 
these  presented  types  of  full-rounded  manhood,  in  com- 
parison with  which  his  saints  and  martyrs  seemed  one- 
sided and  dwarfed  in  development.  It  was  thus  through 
acquaintance  with  the  remote  past  that  the  medieval 
scholar  came  to  realize  that  his  fundamental  assumptions 
sorely  needed  revision. 

The  approach  to  this  New  Learning  concerning  the  old 
world  was  through  the  classic  literature  of  Greece  and 
Rome.  Petrarch  and  Boccaccio  in  the  fourteenth  century 
were  pioneers  in  this  field.  In  the  next  century  it  had 
enthusiastic  explorers  among  the  ablest  students  in  every 
land  in  western  Europe.  The  natural  extension  of  the 
movement  was  accelerated  somewhat  by  the  coming  of 
Greek  scholars,  with  their  priceless  manuscripts,  from  the 
eastern  lands  which  were  being  overrun  by  the  Turk. 

The  immediate  effect  of  this  new  interest  in  the  litera- 
tures of  Greece  and  Rome  was  to  divert  attention  some- 
what from  scholastic  theology  in  all  the  schools  in  which 
it  gained  a  place.  The  study  of  these  classic  languages 
became  a  passion,  and  the  imitation  of  the  style  of  classic 
authors  an  academic  fad.  It  was  not  strange  if  university 
students  neglected  the  Church  Fathers  to  read  Horace  or 
Juvenal,  or  felt  the  lack  of  charm  in  the  writings  of  the 
theologians  after  reading  the  polished  periods  of  Cicero. 
But  the  secondary  effects  of  Humanistic  studies  were  far 
more  serious,  and  led  to  their  exclusion  by  some  institu- 
tions.    In  Italy  especially,  the  Renaissance  tended  to 


Remoter  Environment  25 

lessen  allegiance  to  the  Church  and  substitute  pagan  for 
Christian  morals.  This  was  noticeable  even  in  high  eccles- 
iastical circles.  A  new  point  of  view  and  acquaintance 
with  the  free  speculation  of  the  ancient  philosophers  made 
some  humanistic  scholars  impatient  with  the  Church's 
rigid  dogmatic  system.  These  influences  caused  many  to 
look  with  apprehension  upon  the  growing  popularity  of 
the  New  Learning.  But  in  the  main  their  fears  proved 
ungrounded.  Whatever  may  have  been  its  first  effects 
in  Italy,  the  final  results  of  the  movement  in  the  Church 
at  large  were  unquestionably  beneficial.  Besides  affording 
them  a  truer  perspective  on  life  and  a  greater  freedom  of 
thought,  it  trained  the  scholars  of  the  Church  in  a  histori- 
cal method  of  approach  and  gave  them  a  linguistic  equip- 
ment which  opened  to  them  the  treasures  of  the  New 
Testament  and  the  patristic  literature,  and  so  prepared 
the  way  for  the  Reformation. 

Humanism  had  its  birth  in  Italy  and  gradually  made 
its  way  northward.  Its  greatest  representative  from  the 
Netherlands  was  Erasmus;  but  a  generation  before  him, 
Wessel  afforded  a  notable  example  of  the  way  in  which  the 
New  Learning  could  be  made  contributary  to  Christian 
theology  and  ethics.  In  any  exact  classification,  Wessel 
is  to  be  thought  of  as  a  Humanist  quite  as  much  as  a 
Reformer,  for  Humanism  formed  the  dominant  intellec- 
tual influence  of  his  century.  It  had  early  possessed 
distinguished  teachers  in  the  schools  of  the  Brethren  of  the 
Common  Life,  and  Wessel  came  under  its  influence  in  his 
youth  and  gave  much  of  his  manhood  to  its  extension. 

A  glance  at  the  political  history  of  Europe  in  the  fif- 
teenth century  affords  an  illustration  of  the  desperate  con- 
flicts which  were  incident  to  the  development  of  modern 
national  life.  It  was  a  time  of  war  and  rumors  of  war, 
of  rapidly  changing  boundaries,  and  the  emergence  of 
new  political  forces.    Wessel,  like  the  other  great  scholars 


26  Wessel  Gansfort 

of  his  day,  was  in  a  certain  sense  a  man  of  the  world.  He 
traveled  widely,  and  lived  for  a  time  in  Paris  and  in  Rome, 
vortices  of  the  world's  political  life.  He  was  not  an  ex- 
ample of  cloistered  scholarship,  and  could  not  have  been 
uninfluenced  by  the  stirring  events  occurring  about  him. 
They  doubtless  contributed  to  shape  his  thought  and 
determine  his  convictions,  especially  on  such  subjects  as 
the  Divine  Providence,  on  which  he  wrote  a  treatise. 

Probably  the  most  significant  movement  in  the  political 
life  of  Europe  during  his  time  was  the  invasion  by  the 
Ottoman  Turks.  Begun  the  century  before,  it  swept 
forward  irresistibly,  overwhelming  what  we  now  call  the 
Balkan  States,  taking  possession  of  Constantinople,  and 
threatening  the  Empire  itself.  To  resist  this  incursion  of 
an  alien  race  and  a  hostile  faith  church  councils  were  held 
and  crusades  announced.  The  monarchs  of  western 
Europe  were  appealed  to  by  the  Byzantine  Christians. 
But  all  to  no  avail.  The  Turkish  conquerors  added  one 
province  to  another  till  they  became  a  great  European 
power  with  a  territory  larger  than  that  of  France,  and  with 
plans  of  further  conquest  which  terrified  many  a  Christian 
state.  Yet  no  Charles  Martel  arose  to  turn  back  the  tide 
of  invasion.  It  was,  however,  during  this  century  that 
Spain,  by  the  conquest  of  Granada,  removed  the  last 
reminder  of  an  earlier  Moslem  invasion  of  Europe. 

During  the  fifteenth  century  the  Empire  was  in  point  of 
political  development  the  most  backward  nation  of  western 
Europe.  While  the  countries  about  it  were  making  pro- 
gress toward  true  national  life  and  centralized  government, 
it  still  retained  its  feudal  constitution.  Its  lack  of  unifica- 
tion and  the  mutual  jealousy  of  its  constituent  kingdoms 
and  provinces  made  it  ineffective  in  diplomacy  or  war.  Its 
emperor  was  no  longer  regarded  as  the  divinely  appointed 
ruler  of  all  Christendom, but  simply  as  a  German  sovereign. 
The  century  opened  with  the  deposition  of  Wenceslaus  of 


Remoter  Environment  27 

the  House  of  Luxemburg.  His  brother  Sigismund,  who, 
after  an  interval,  followed  him  upon  the  throne,  was  the 
last  of  this  house  to  win  imperial  honors.  Their  reigns 
were  disturbed  and  their  Bohemian  territories  distracted 
by  the  long  Hussite  Wars,  It  was  Sigismund  who  called 
the  Council  of  Constance,  and  violated  his  safe-conduct 
for  John  Huss.  In  1440  he  was  succeeded  upon  the  im- 
perial throne  by  Frederick  III  of  the  House  of  Hapsburg, 
who  reigned  until  nearly  the  end  of  the  century.  Freder- 
ick possessed  and  deserved  little  authority  over  his  fellow 
princes,  for  he  neglected  the  interests  of  the  Empire  to 
advance  those  of  his  own  personal  domain  and  left  the 
protection  of  Europe  from  Turkish  aggression  to  the 
Hungarians  and  the  Poles. 

The  Italian  peninsula  was  theoretically  a  part  of  the 
Empire,  but  actually  independent.  It  consisted  of  five 
states,  the  duchy  of  Milan,  the  republics  of  Venice  and 
Florence,  the  principality  of  the  pope,  and  the  kingdom  of 
Naples.  Italian  unity  was  as  yet  merely  the  dream  of 
idealists.  Each  state  had  its  own  interests  and  ambitions. 
Yet  here  the  Renaissance  had  its  birth  and  popular  liberty 
its  early  successful  experiments,  while  the  larger  cities 
had  reached  an  industrial  development  and  a  degree  of 
refinement  and  elegance  unattained  as  yet  in  northern 
Europe.  In  Florence,  civic  and  religious  reform  had  an 
eloquent  but  unfortunate  champion  in  Savonarola.  The 
predominant  interest  in  Italy,  however,  was  commercial 
and  intellectual  rather  than  religious.  This  fact  must  have 
been  apparent  to  Wessel  during  his  residence  in  Rome 
about  1470. 

Political  interest  in  the  fifteenth  century  centers  in  the 
relations  of  France  and  England,  whose  Hundred  Years' 
War  did  not  end  till  1453.  Large  areas  in  France  were 
devastated  by  this  long  contest,  and  the  industrial  develop- 
ment of  the  country  was  brought  to  a  standstill.    While 


28  Wessel  Gansfort 

the  honors  of  war  were  largely  with  the  invading  English 
armies,  yet  the  tide  of  fortune  turned  with  the  romantic 
career  of  Joan  of  Arc,  and  at  the  conclusion  of  peace, 
England  had  lost  practically  all  her  possessions  in  France. 
This  was  a  fortunate  settlement,  for  it  left  each  country 
free  to  develop  its  distinct  national  Hfe.  France  at  once 
entered  upon  a  period  of  great  material  improvement,  and 
in  spite  of  the  ambitious  aims  of  Burgundy,  extended  her 
territory,  and  centralized  her  government  in  the  person  of 
her  king,  who  instead  of  being  merely  the  foremost  peer 
of  the  realm  became  a  true  monarch. 

England  was  less  fortunate,  for  the  contest  between  two 
royal  families  for  the  possession  of  the  crown,  which  we  call 
the  Wars  of  the  Roses,  began  as  soon  as  the  conflict  with 
France  ceased  and  lasted  a  whole  generation.  But  in 
compensation  for  the  material  injuries  entailed  by  this 
long  civil  war,  and  partly  as  a  result  of  its  destruction  of 
so  many  noble  families,  the  monarchs  of  the  new  Tudor 
dynasty  which  came  into  power  in  1485  were  to  give 
England  a  strong,  if  somewhat  despotic,  government,  and 
provide  the  conditions  for  her  industrial  and  commercial 
development. 

In  Spain  also  there  was  manifest  the  same  movement 
toward  centralization  in  government  and  a  unified  national 
life.  Under  Ferdinand  and  Isabella  Castile  and  Aragon 
were  united  and  both  grandees  and  clergy  brought  into 
subserviency  to  the  crown.  Their  conquest  of  Granada 
at  the  end  of  the  century  gave  to  Spain  the  boundaries 
which  she  has  to-day,  and  prepared  the  way  for  her  great 
future  influence  in  European  politics. 

It  is  noteworthy  that  the  rise  of  monarchy  was  attended 
by  evidences  of  industrial  and  political  discontent  among 
the  common  people,  who  dreamed  of  representative 
government  and  larger  popular  Hberties.  There  was 
developing  almost  everywhere  a  feeling  of  resentment 


Remoter  Environment  29 

against  the  old  feudal  principle  of  personal  privilege. 
While  the  writings  of  Wessel  make  few  references  to  the 
political  occurrences  of  his  times,  yet  he  could  not  have 
been  insensible  to  the  trend  of  events,  and  his  pronounced 
individualism  in  religious  matters  shows  his  intellectual 
sympathy  with  movements  among  his  own  people  in 
resistance  to  arbitrary  political  authority.  In  fact  he 
expresses  political  sentiments  of  a  most  democratic 
character.  He  had  no  more  disposition  to  admit  the 
divme  right  of  kings  than  the  divine  authority  of  the  pope. 

If  we  speak  of  the  sixteenth  century  as  that  of  the 
Reformation,  we  may  well  characterize  the  fifteenth  as 
that  of  attempted  reform.  The  attempts  were  of  two 
sorts:  those  made  by  the  officials  of  the  Church  and 
formally  adopted  as  a  part  of  her  policy;  and  those  made 
by  individuals,  and  unauthorized  or  opposed  by  the 
authorities  of  the  Church.  They  may  be  noticed  in  this 
order. 

The  humihation  of  the  papacy  due  to  its  seventy  years* 
residence,  under  French  domination,  at  Avignon  was 
almost  immediately  followed  by  an  even  greater  abasement 
of  the  papal  dignity.  This  was  the  great  Western  Schism 
which  for  forty  years  divided  the  Christian  Church  in 
Europe  into  two  hostile  camps.  It  began  in  1378,  when 
the  cardinals  found  themselves  unable  to  endure  the 
arbitrary  rule  of  Urban  VI,  and  ventured  to  seek  reHef 
by  the  election  of  a  rival  pope  in  the  person  of  Clement 
VII.  He  was  well  suited  to  lead  an  insurrection,  for 
although  a  cardinal  and  connected  by  birth  with  many 
royal  houses,  he  was  by  profession  a  soldier  and  had 
figured  more  on  battle-fields  and  in  massacres  than  at  the 
papal  court.  The  two  rival  popes,  each  supported  by 
cardinals,  first  heartily  anathematized  each  other,  and 
then  set  about  dividing  the  Church  territory  and  emolu- 
ments between  them.     The  nations  took  sides  according 


30  Wessel  Gansfort 

to  their  political  sympathies,  and  there  began  a  period  of 
bitter  strife,  of  relaxed  discipline,  and  general  demoraliza- 
tion in  the  life  of  the  Church. 

It  was  the  purpose  of  the  Reforming  Councils  to  reunite 
the  Church  and  correct  the  abuses  which  had  become  most 
flagrant  during  the  rule  of  the  rival  popes.  The  first  was 
called  by  a  group  of  the  better  disposed  cardinals  repre- 
senting both  parties.  It  met  at  Pisa  in  1409,  and  proved 
to  be  fairly  representative  of  the  Church.  It  deposed  both 
popes  and  elected  another  in  their  place;  but  the  reforms 
which  many  were  urging,  the  new  pope  postponed  for  the 
consideration  of  another  council  which  he  promised  to  call 
in  three  years.  As  the  deposed  popes  declined  to  withdraw 
there  were  now  three  claimants  to  the  papal  chair,  and  the 
new  pope  who  died  within  a  year  was  succeeded  by  John 
XXIII,  of  most  unsavory  reputation.  The  situation  being 
now  worse  than  before,  a  second  Reforming  Council  was 
called  by  Emperor  Sigismund  and  the  pope.  It  met  at 
Constance  in  1414.  In  dealing  with  the  papal  succession 
it  was  more  successful  than  that  of  Pisa,  but  it  failed  to 
address  itself  effectively  to  the  reforms  for  which  the  better 
elements  in  the  Council,  lay  and  clerical,  were  making 
demand.  The  newly  elected  pope  opposed  reformatory 
legislation  and  sought  to  appease  the  reformers  by  vague 
promises  and  unimportant  concessions.  This  Council 
challenges  interest  from  many  considerations.  It  tried 
for  heresy  and  condemned  to  the  flames  John  Huss  and 
Jerome  of  Prague.  It  affirmed  that  a  lawfully  assembled 
Ecumenical  Council,  such  as  it  declared  itself  to  be,  has 
its  authority  immediately  from  Christ  and  must  be 
obeyed  by  all  Christians,  even  the  pope  himself.  It 
committed  itself  to  the  statement  that  the  Church  was  in 
crying  need  of  reformation  "in  its  head  and  members," 
and  it  made  provision  that  a  General  Council  should 
thereafter  meet  every  ten  years. 


Remoter  Environment  31 

Sixteen  years  elapsed  before  the  pope,  in  response  to 
a  general  demand  for  it,  convened  the  third  Reforming 
Council  at  Basel.  In  the  meantime  he  had  somewhat 
restored  the  lost  prestige  of  his  high  office,  though  papal 
extortion  had  in  no  wise  abated.  The  Council  reaffirmed  its 
supreme  authority  and  did  not  hesitate  to  legislate  for  the 
pope.  It  came  to  an  agreement  with  the  followers  of  Huss, 
who  had  been  in  rebellion  against  their  king  and  the 
Church,  and  it  passed  measures  calculated  to  correct  such 
papal  abuses  as  reservations  and  annates  and  the  reckless 
use  of  the  interdict.  A  session  of  the  Council  was  held  at 
Florence  in  1438  to  meet  the  representatives  of  the  Eastern 
Church,  who  were  seeking  the  assistance  of  Western 
Christendom  in  resistance  to  Turkish  invasion.  The 
Greek  ecclesiastics  came  as  suppliants,  and  they  were 
required  to  concede  most  of  the  points  at  issue  between 
them  and  the  Western  Church  as  the  basis  of  a  reunion 
of  Christendom,  and  the  price  of  military  assistance. 
But  their  humiliating  concessions  were  made  in  vain,  for 
the  pope's  subjects  were  mdifferent  to  the  fate  of  Con- 
stantinople, and  the  Greek  Church  promptly  repudiated 
the  action  of  its  delegates.  Though  the  Council  main- 
tained a  nominal  existence  till  1449  it  accomplished 
comparatively  little  in  the  way  of  radical  reform. 

However  unsuccessful  these  Councils  may  have  been, 
they  established  an  important  precedent.  The  Church 
now  had  a  resource  in  case  the  abuse  of  papal  power 
became  intolerable.  The  threat  of  a  General  Council  had 
a  wholesome  effect  upon  the  popes.  Advocates  of  reform 
hoped  that  it  might  be  again  convened;  and,  later,  Luther 
appealed  from  the  verdict  of  the  pope  and  the  Diet  to  the 
decision  of  a  General  Council.  But  a  whole  century  was  to 
elapse,  and  the  Protestant  Reformation  pass  through  its 
first  stage,  before  the  next  Reforming  Council,  that  of 
Trent,  was  called. 


32  Wessel  Gansfort 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  Wessel  was  much  influenced, 
as  every  other  thoughtful  man  must  have  been,  by  the 
action  of  these  Councils.  They  had  repeatedly  affirmed  the 
Church's  crying  need  of  sweeping  reforms,  and  they  had  as- 
serted and  acted  upon  the  principle  that  the  consensus  of 
the  Church's  representatives,  and  not  the  dictum  of  the 
pope,  constituted  the  Christian's  final  authority.  The  fre- 
quency of  Wessel's  allusions  to  John  Gerson,  Chancellor 
of  the  University  of  Paris  and  promoter  of  the  Councils  at 
Pisa  and  Constance,  shows  the  deep  interest  that  he  had 
taken  in  these  attempts  of  the  Church  to  reform  herself. 
The  Council  of  Basel  was  still  in  session  when  he  became  a 
student  in  the  University  at  Cologne. 

Even  more  influential  in  shaping  the  future  of  the 
Church  were  the  unofficial  efforts  being  made  at  her 
reformation.  The  Councils  sought  to  reform  the  Church's 
organization  and  administration,  these  other  attempts 
were  directed  toward  her  doctrines  as  well.  They  were 
based,  not  so  much  on  theories  as  to  the  proper  constitu- 
tion of  the  Church,  or  consciousness  of  the  corruption  in 
the  Church's  administration,  as  upon  a  knowledge  of  the 
New  Testament  and  the  contrast  between  its  teachings 
and  the  dogmas  of  the  Church.  The  pioneer  in  this 
reformation  of  the  Church  on  the  basis  of  the  Scriptures 
was  Wyclif,  whose  remarkable  career  came  to  a  peaceful 
end  in  1384.  In  all  important  particulars  he  anticipated 
the  reformatory  doctrines  of  Luther,  but  with  a  radicalism, 
and  disregard  for  precedent  to  which  the  Wittenberg 
reformer  was  a  stranger.  His  chief  confidence  for  the 
permanence  of  the  movement  that  he  led  rested  in  his 
translation  of  the  Scriptures  into  the  language  of  the  com- 
mon people.  And  in  this  he  was  not  to  be  disappointed. 
For  though  his  followers  met  severe  persecution  and  were 
outlawed  by  the  government,  yet  they  escaped  exter- 
mination ;  and  the  movement  lived  a  kind  of  subterranean 


Remoter  Environment  33 

life  till  the  sixteenth  century.  But  it  was  in  Bohemia  that 
Wyclif's  teachings  were  to  bear  their  fullest  harvest.  John 
Huss  and  Jerome  of  Prague,  ardent  disciples  of  his,  found 
their  countrymen  quite  prepared  to  accept  his  evangelical 
doctrines  and  radical  reforms.  Though  they  were  con- 
demned to  death  by  the  Council  of  Constance  as  heretics, 
yet  that  fact  and  the  pope's  command  that  the  Bohemian 
heresy  be  suppressed  by  whatever  means  might  be  neces- 
sary only  added  fuel  to  the  fire.  The  movement  spread 
with  great  rapidity,  and  took  on  the  character  of  a  na- 
tional revolt.  It  met  persecution  with  armed  resistance, 
successfully  defied  the  Emperor,  and  secured  from  the 
Council  of  Basel  important  concessions.  After  making 
their  peace  with  the  Church  the  Bohemian  reformers 
ceased  to  be  actively  aggressive,  but  they  remained  a  party 
in  the  Church  during  the  lifetime  of  Wessel,  and  blended 
with  the  reformation  movement  of  the  next  century. 

Besides  these  attempts  at  Church  reform  in  England 
and  Bohemia,  less  conspicuous  agencies  were  at  work 
elsewhere.'  It  is  impossible  to  estimate  the  extent  to 
which  the  influence  of  the  Waldenses  and  kindred  move- 
ments may  have  penetrated  the  industrial  classes  of  the 
northern  cities,  but  it,  no  less  than  the  mysticism  of  the 
Rhine  country,  contributed  to  the  popular  demand  ior 
betterment  in  the  life  of  the  Church.  Among  the  more 
educated  classes  the  well-known  writings  of  such  scholars 
as  Marsilius,  Clemanges,  Gerson,  d'Ailly,  Ullerston,  and 
others  who  boldly  criticized  the  administration  of  the 
Church,  had  awakened  a  sense  of  her  dire  need  of 
thorough  amendment,  while  the  authority  of  the  pope  and 
his  right  to  temporal  possessions  were  being  assailed  from 
many  directions. 

Thus  it  is  apparent  that  Wessel,  in  criticizing  the  pope 
and  the  Church,  stood  in  a  long  succession  of  notable  men, 
and  gave  expression  also  to  widespread  popular  sentiment. 

VOL.    1-3 


34  Wessel  Gansfort 

Yet  it  must  be  admitted  that  the  increased  power  of  the 
papacy  after  the  Council  of  Basel,  and  the  abler  adminis- 
tration of  papal  politics,  afforded  less  encouragement  to 
popular  expectation  of  the  needed  reforms  in  the  Church. 
The  mature  life  of  Wessel  spans  six  pontificates;  one  of 
the  popes  was  his  personal  friend.  With  the  main  features  , 
of  the  character  and  policy  of  them  all  he  must  have  been 
somewhat  familiar.  Upon  his  knowledge  of  them  he 
formed  his  conception  of  the  papacy,  Nicholas  V,  whose 
pontificate  began  during  the  Council  of  Basel,  did  much 
to  restore  the  prestige  of  the  papacy.  He  was  a  man  of 
estimable  character  and  fine  scholarship,  the  first  Human- 
ist to  occupy  the  papal  chair.  He  was  a  patron  of  learning 
and  of  architecture,  a  collector  of  manuscripts  and  the 
founder  of  the  Vatican  Library.  For  the  protection  of 
himself  and  future  popes  he  built  fortresses  in  Rome  and 
elsewhere  in  the  papal  states.  His  relations  in  Italy  were 
far  from  peaceful,  and  most  of  his  political  ventures,  such 
as  the  advocacy  of  a  crusade  in  defense  of  Constantinople, 
brought  him  little  satisfaction.  The  most  successful 
incidents  of  his  pontificate  were  the  Jubilee  of  the  year 
1450  when  pilgrims  from  all  Christendom  flocked  to  Rome 
in  tens  of  thousands  with  gifts  that  filled  the  papal 
treasury,  and  his  coronation  of  Emperor  Frederick  HI 
in  1452,  when  it  seemed  for  the  moment  that  the  ancient 
splendor  of  the  Church  and  the  Empire  had  been  restored. 
But  Nicholas  never  ventured  to  attempt  any  of  the 
promised  reforms  in  the  administration  of  the  Church  and 
he  lived  in  dread  of  another  General  Council. 

The  brief  pontificate  of  Calixtus  HI  was  chiefly  occu- 
pied with  a  vain  attempt  to  summon  Europe  to  the 
repression  of  Turkish  invasion.  The  pope's  own  ill- 
considered  expeditions  came  to  nothing.  He  neglected  all 
the  nobler  undertakings  begun  by  his  predecessor,  and 
was  chiefly  concerned  to  place  his  unworthy  relatives  in 


Remoter  Environment  35 

the  highest  positions  in  the  Church.  The  pope  who  took 
the  title  Pius  II  had  long  been  a  conspicuous  figure  in  the 
diplomatic  world.  He  was  a  Humanist  of  lax  morals,  a 
typical  literary  fortune-hunter.  In  the  Council  of  Basel 
his  eloquence  had  been  directed  against  the  claims  of  the 
pope,  but  his  elevation  to  the  papal  chair  wrought  a 
complete  change  in  his  attitude  alike  toward  Humanism 
and  reform  and  the  claims  of  the  papacy.  Though  he  had 
committed  himself  to  the  organization  of  a  crusade  against 
the  Turks,  he  postponed  it  till  the  approach  of  his  death 
insured  its  failure,  while  he  devoted  his  great  talents  to  the 
conquest  of  the  papal  states,  the  aggrandizement  of  his 
family,  and  the  increase  of  papal  authority.  In  accom- 
plishing the  latter  he  had  to  retreat  from  his  earlier  posi- 
tion as  the  champion  of  the  supreme  authority  of  a  General 
Council,  and  an  advocate  of  drastic  reform. 

With  Paul  II,  a  nephew  of  Pius  II,  the  tide  in  the  papal 
fortunes  turned ;  the  priestly  character  of  the  popes  began 
to  be  absorbed  in  that  of  territorial  lords.  This  trend 
became  more  noticeable  in  the  pontificate  of  his  successor. 
Paul  II  was  a  man  of  character  and  culture,  a  patron  of 
architecture  and  an  art  collector,  but  he  had  no  sympathy 
with  the  Humanists,  and  made  his  displeasure  felt  by  the 
Roman  Academy,  which  showed  a  strong  atheistical  bent. 
The  cardinals  whom  he  created  were  all  able  men,  though, 
following  the  vicious  custom  of  his  day,  he  chose  three  of 
them  from  among  his  nephews.  His  one  great  venture,  the 
restoration  of  Bohemia  to  Catholic  uniformity,  involved 
eastern  Europe  in  a  fruitless  war,  and  prepared  the  way  for 
further  Turkish  aggression.  He  attempted  none  of  the 
reforms  which  the  Councils  had  advocated. 

The  last  pope  who  could  have  influenced  Wessel's 
attitude  toward  the  papacy  was  his  friend,  who  in  1471 
ascended  the  papal  throne  with  the  title  Sixtus  IV.  Wessel 
was  living  at  Rome  at  the  time,  and  had  attained  some 


36  Wessel  Gansfort 

distinction  there  as  a  scholar.  It  is  quite  in  accord  with 
the  policy  of  Sixtus  that  he  should  have  asked  his  friend 
to  name  some  ecclesiastical  position  that  he  might  desire 
to  occupy.  Sixtus  had  by  sheer  ability  and  ambition 
risen  from  utter  obscurity  to  the  position  of  General  of  the 
Franciscan  Order,  University  Lecturer  on  Theology,  and 
finally  Cardinal.  He  was  fifty-seven  years  old  when 
elected  pope,  and  his  rule  of  thirteen  years  left  a  permanent 
impression  on  the  character  of  the  papacy.  He  afforded 
another  illustration  of  the  fact  that  the  blameless  personal 
life  of  a  pope  is  no  assurance  against  a  vicious  and  demor- 
alizing papal  policy.  Sixtus  had  been  an  exemplary 
Franciscan  theologian  and  a  reformer  of  monasteries,  but 
as  pope  his  one  concern  was  to  figure  as  a  temporal  prince 
and  make  the  papacy  the  leading  political  power  of  Italy. 
To  accomplish  this  worldly  end  he  heartily  adopted 
worldly  means  of  the  most  questionable  sort.  With  an 
upstart's  passion  to  give  power  and  distinction  to  his 
family,  he  was  reckless  in  his  nepotism.  Eight  of  his  rela- 
tives were  made  cardinals,  and  many  others  were  en- 
riched at  the  expense  of  the  Church,  or  enabled  to  make 
matrimonial  alliance  with  princely  houses.  Naturally, 
these  relatives  were  his  ready  agents  in  carrying  out  his 
political  schemes.  The  lavish  splendor  in  which  some  of 
them  lived  became  a  scandal  even  in  Rome.  His  political 
ambitions  involved  him  in  disastrous  wars  with  the  other 
leading  powers  in  Italy,  in  diplomatic  intrigues,  and  in 
assassinations.  In  thus  maintaining  the  character  of  an 
ambitious  prince,  the  pope  forfeited  what  remained  of  his 
prestige  as  the  Spiritual  Father  of  Christendom.  He 
ceased  to  offer  any  effective  resistance  to  the  corrupt 
influences  of  the  age.  The  papacy  became  secularized,  its 
religious  functions  were  largely  formal  and  perfunctory. 
It  was  this  secularization  of  the  papacy,  completed  by 
Sixtus'  successors,  that  alienated  from  it  the  nations  of 


Remoter  Environment  37 

northern  Europe  and  opened  the  way  for  the  Protestant 
revolt.  In  spite  of  his  character  as  an  unscrupulous 
politician,  Sixtus  was  a  patron  of  literature  and  art,  and 
Rome  still  bears  the  marks  of  his  architectural  enterprise 
and  taste.  The  Sistine  Chapel  constitutes  the  best-known 
monument  to  his  aesthetic  interest. 

Wessel  had  left  Rome  soon  after  the  election  of  his 
friend,  and  it  is  easy  to  conceive  his  disappointment  in 
the  papal  policy  of  one  from  whom  he  and  the  world  might 
well  have  expected  better  things.  During  his  pontificate 
all  advocates  of  reform  in  the  Church  or  society  saw  their 
hopes  deferred. 

As  has  been  already  intimated.  Humanism  was  the 
distinctive  intellectual  movement  of  the  fifteenth  century. 
Its  transplantation  from  Italy  to  the  Germanic  lands  was 
a  slow  process,  and  was  still  in  progress  when  the  Refor- 
mation broke  out.  Its  propagators  were  polished  Italian 
diplomats  like  ^neas  Sylvius,  scholastic  adventurers 
like  Peter  Luder  who  had  studied  or  at  least  traveled  in 
Italy,  later  Italian  and  Greek  scholars  seeking  employ- 
ment in  northern  lands,  and  finally  earnest  students  who 
went  to  Italy  with  the  intention  of  bringing  the  New 
Learning  back  to  the  Fatherland.  Of  these  last  Agricola 
is  an  early  representative.  Born  near  Groningen,  almost 
a  generation  after  Wessel,  he  studied  in  the  northern 
universities  of  Erfurt,  Louvain,  and  Cologne,  and  then 
traveled  in  Italy  and  spent  some  time  at  the  universities 
of  Pavia  and  Ferrara.  Upon  his  return,  he  became 
attached  to  the  court  of  the  Elector  Philip  at  Heidelberg, 
in  whose  university  and  also  at  Worms  he  lectured  on 
Greek  and  Latin  literature.  A  pupil  of  his  in  the  humani- 
ties was  Hegius,  who  gave  such  distinction  to  the  school 
of  the  Brethren  of  the  Common  Life  at  Deventer  that  its 
attendance  reached  two  thousand.  Through  the  labors  of 
such  men,  there  grew  up  in  Germany  in  the  latter  half  of 


38  Wessel  Gansfort 

the  century  such  a  popular  desire  for  instruction  in  the 
classic  languages  that  lectureships  on  the  subject  were 
established  in  many  of  its  leading  schools.  The  attractive 
power  of  such  courses  soon  became  recognized. 

But  it  must  not  be  supposed  that  the  New  Learning  at 
once  diverted  interest  from  the  scholastic  contentions 
with  which  the  students  of  philosophy  and  theology  had 
long  been  accustomed  to  sharpen  their  wits.  These  still 
constituted  the  piece  de  resistance  in  the  intellectual 
pabulum  provided  the  ambitious  student.  The  diverse 
modes  of  thinking  represented  by  the  Greek  sages  Plato 
and  Aristotle  had  been  applied  to  Christian  doctrine  and 
had  resulted  in  the  development  of  two  antagonistic 
schools  of  Christian  thought  represented  by  Realism  and 
Nominalism.  The  contest  between  them  had  grown  the 
more  bitter  because  of  the  championship  of  them  by  dif- 
ferent institutions  and  rival  monastic  orders.  It  had  long 
engrossed,  and  in  a  sense  sterilized,  the  intellectual  life  of 
many  of  the  schools.  How  absorbing  this  contention  was 
may  be  inferred  from  the  fact  that  even  a  man  like  Wessel, 
coming  from  such  an  atmosphere  as  that  of  the  school  at 
Zwolle,  and  preoccupied  with  biblical  studies,  should  have 
been  drawn  into  it  at  Cologne,  and  should  have  gone  to 
Paris  as  a  champion  of  Realism.  It  has  been  said  that 
the  Renaissance  rediscovered  man  and  the  earth,  both  of 
which  the  Schoolmen  had  forgotten  in  their  absorption 
in  philosophical  abstractions. 

No  doubt  the  greatest  stimulus  to  the  intellectual  life 
of  the  fifteenth  century  was  the  invention  of  printing  and 
the  improvement  of  its  necessary  concomitant,  linen  and 
cotton  paper.  Though  the  dilettante  Humanist  might 
continue  to  prefer  his  parchment  manuscript  to  the 
mechanically  produced  book,  yet  the  comparative  cheap- 
ness of  the  latter  made  it  an  inestimable  boon  toi  the 
ordinary  student.    The  first  product  of  the  press  of  Guten- 


-z-    'i 
O  > 

o 


o 


P^ 


■l^'itt^ 


Remoter  Environment  39 

berg  was  a  complete  Latin  Bible  issued  about  1455.  In  a 
few  decades  printing  presses  were  in  operation  in  almost 
every  country  of  Europe,  and  the  way  was  prepared  for  a 
wide  and  swift  dissemination  of  new  ideas. 

There  was  much  freedom  of  religious  thought  in  the 
fifteenth  century.  The  papacy  was  disorganized  for  long 
periods.  The  Great  Schism  and  the  Reforming  Councils 
had  broken  the  spell  of  papal  authority  and  had  afforded 
the  leading  scholars  of  the  Church  opportunity  to  debate 
questions  of  doctrine  and  polity  in  great  free  assemblages 
whose  transactions  were  everywhere  the  subject  of  com- 
ment. Freedom  of  debate  develops  freedom  of  thought, 
and  the  revival  of  the  long-neglected  Ecumenical  Council 
with  its  opportunity  of  free  discussion  promised  much  for 
the  emancipation  of  the  intellectual  life  of  the  Church. 
In  the  sixteenth  century,  sharp  doctrinal  contests  between 
two  rather  clearly  defined  parties  and  the  consequent 
threat  of  disruption  in  the  Church  developed  a  persecuting 
intolerance  in  the  Roman  authorities  which  soon  found  its 
counterpart  in  Protestantism.  But  during  the  fifteenth 
century  there  was  a  more  tolerant  spirit  abroad  and  men 
who  held  views  quite  divergent  from  current  orthodoxy 
might,  like  Wessel,  find  protection  even  under  the  papal 
£egis.  The  extensive  compromises  that  some  members  of 
the  Council  at  Basel  were  willing  to  make  with  the  Hussites 
is  a  good  illustration  of  this  fact. 

Surprise  has  been  expressed  that  a  man  holding  such 
views  as  did  Wessel  should  have  been  relatively  free  from 
persecution  and  should  have  ended  his  days  peacefully  in 
the  bosom  of  the  Church.  But  there  were  many  in  his 
century,  some  of  them  in  high  ecclesiastical  position,  who 
made  no  secret  of  their  dissent  from  the  dogmas  of  the 
Church.  Of  this  fact  Nicholas  of  Cusa,  a  contemporary  of 
Wessel,  affords  a  striking  example.  He  was  from  the  Rhine 
region,  and  received  his  early  education  from  the  Brethren 


40  Wessel  Gansfort 

of  the  Common  Life  at  Deventer.  Later  in  different 
schools  he  studied  mathematics  and  astronomy  as  well  as 
Greek  and  Hebrew  and  philosophy.  Because  of  his  extra- 
ordinary talents  he  made  rapid  ascent  of  the  ecclesiastical 
ladder  and  before  he  was  fifty  had  become  cardinal  and 
archbishop.  He  was  a  humanistic  scholar,  a  mystic,  a 
bold  speculator  in  philosophy.  Bruno  claimed  him  as  his 
master  and  students  of  the  history  of  philosophy  have 
found  in  his  writings  anticipations  of  certain  views  of 
Kant  and  Hegel.  But  most  remarkable  of  all  was  his 
advocacy  of  the  doctrine  of  the  essential  unity  of  all 
religious  faiths.  In  1453,  about  the  time  that  Wessel 
went  to  Paris,  he  published  a  booklet  entitled  The 
Harmony  of  Religions,  in  which  he  contends  that  diver- 
sity in  religious  thought  and  worship  is  the  inevitable  result 
of  human  freedom  and  is  not  incompatible  with  a  deeper 
unity,  which  it  is  the  function  of  the  true  prophet  to  dis- 
cover, so  that  all  intolerance  and  persecution  may  cease. 
It  reads  like  the  brochure  of  some  modern  promoter  of  a 
Congress  of  Religions,  Yet  Nicholas  was  not  disturbed; 
he  enjoyed  the  intimate  friendship  of  the  pope,  and  was 
his  trusted  representative  on  many  important  occasions. 
Wessel  himself  was  to  discover  in  Rome  a  circle  of  ecclesi- 
astics very  near  to  the  papal  throne  in  which  there  was 
much  ill-concealed  dissent  from  current  orthodoxy,  if  not 
tacit  unbelief.  It  was  an  age  in  which  many  bold  spirits 
were  breaking  the  shackles  of  traditional  thought. 


CHAPTER   III 

HIS    YOUTH 

The  life  of  John  Wessel  was  preeminently  that  of  a 
scholar.  The  interest  that  he  has  excited  has  been  due, 
not  to  any  dramatic  episodes  in  his  career,  or  any  dis- 
tinguished public  services  that  he  rendered,  but  solely  to 
his  contribution  to  the  religious  thought  of  his  age.  Al- 
though his  was  not  the  cloistered  scholarship  that  depends 
upon  the  publisher  for  its  influence,  yet  it  cannot  be  said 
that  his  contacts  with  his  contemporaries  were  such  as  to 
excite  popular  notice.  He  was  a  man  of  the  schools,  a 
teacher,  a  writer,  a  traveler  in  search  of  knowledge. 
There  is  little  in  the  external  aspects  of  his  career  to  dis- 
tinguish him  from  the  typical  medieval  schoolman,  the 
wandering  devotee  to  learning,  the  errant  champion  of 
ideas  in  the  university  tourneys. 

Those  who  were  concerned  for  the  preservation  of 
Wessel's  writings  apparently  made  no  effort  to  preserve  a 
detailed  record  of  the  occurrences  of  his  life.  His  most 
devoted  disciples  kept  no  Memorabilia  of  their  honored 
teacher.  There  is  no  strictly  contemporary  biography,  or 
even  biographical  sketch  of  him.  The  brief  life  by  Albert 
Hardenberg,  prefixed  to  the  Groningen  edition  of  Wessel's 
writings,  is  the  work  of  one  who  knew  many  of  his  pupils 
and  friends,  and  had  access  to  data  concerning  him  now 
unfortunately  lost.  To  him  and  to  the  few  remaining 
letters  of  Wessel,  and  also  to  incidental  references  to  him 
in  the  writings  of  his  contemporaries,  we  owe  all  that  we 

41 


42  Wessel  Gansfort 

know  of  a  certainty  concerning  this  scholar  so  famous  in 
his  own  generation.  In  the  century  following  his  death 
there  grew  up,  in  the  region  in  which  he  had  spent  most  of 
his  life,  a  mass  of  traditions  concerning  him,  from  which 
his  more  careful  biographers  have  drawn  with  justifiable 
caution.  From  the  reliable  material  at  hand,  we  can 
construct  nothing  more  satisfactory  than  a  bare  outline  of 
Wessel's  life,  though  we  may  venture  to  fill  in  the  outline 
somewhat  with  data  of  less  certain  accuracy. 

John  Wessel  was  born  at  Groningen  about  the  year  1420. 
His  birthplace  is  still  shown  in  Heerestraat,  and  may  be 
identified  by  the  family  coat-of-arms  set  in  the  outer  wall. 
Groningen  was  then  one  of  the  leading  towns  in  the 
northern  Netherlands,  and  had  given  its  name  to  an 
important  province.  It  is  still  a  thriving  city,  with  a 
notable  university  in  which  Professor  Blok,  the  best 
known  recent  historian  of  the  Netherlands,  once  taught. 

Wessel's  relation  in  point  of  time  to  the  Protestant 
Reformation  is  suggested  by  the  fact  that  his  birth  oc- 
curred thirty-five  years  after  the  death  of  Wyclif  and  five 
years  after  the  martyrdom  of  Huss.  Peter  d'Ailly  died 
that  year  and  John  Gerson  nine  years  later,  while  Erasmus 
and  Colet  were  not  to  appear  till  nearly  a  half  century 
later,  and  Luther  and  Zwingli  twenty  years  later  still. 

Beside  the  name  by  which  he  is  usually  known,  John 
Wessel,  he  was  sometimes  given  his  father's  name,  Her- 
man, also,  according  to  the  custom  of  the  times.  He 
likewise  bore  the  name  Gansfort,  or  as  it  is  in  its  Dutch 
form,  Goesevort.  The  origin  of  this  word  has  been  the 
subject  of  much  dispute.  But  there  seems  now  little 
reason  to  doubt  that  it  was  not  a  personal  but  a  family 
name,  derived  from  a  village  in  Westphalia,  from  which 
the  Wessels  had  originally  come.  There  are  families  in 
America  bearing  the  name  in  its  anglicized  form  of  Ganse- 
voort.    It  was  one  of  the  affectations  of  the  Humanists  to 


Youth  43 

latinize  or  hellenize  their  own  names  and  those  of  their 
friends.  Thus  the  ItaHan  Hterary  adventurer  who  became 
Pope  Pius  II  had  called  himself  -^neas  Sylvius,  and 
Philip  Schwarzerd  is  known  to  us  by  the  more  euphonious 
name  of  Melanchthon.  Apparently  the  friends  of  Wessel 
had  sought  some  Greek  equivalent  for  his  name,  and  had 
found  its  nearest  approach  in  that  of  the  patristic  scholar, 
Basilius.  And  by  this  name  he  is  referred  to  by  some  of 
his  friends. 

It  was  a  custom  among  the  Schoolmen  for  students 
to  give  extravagant  titles  to  their  teachers.  Thomas 
Aquinas  was  called  "Doctor  Angelicus, "  Bonaventura, 
"Doctor  Seraphicus,"  and  Peter  Lombard,  "The  Master 
of  Sentences."  Wessel  was  given  two  such  titles.  By  his 
admirers  he  was  called  "Light  of  the  World,"  while  his 
adversaries  dubbed  him,  "Master  of  Contradiction." 
The  former  title  was  a  tribute  to  his  learning  and  perhaps 
also  to  his  extraordinary  gift  of  illuminating  discourse; 
the  latter  was  intended  as  a  reproach,  in  view  of  his  ready 
opposition  to  current  opinion  and  his  love  of  paradox. 
It  is  needless  to  say  that  the  former  alone  appears  in  his 
epitaph. 

Wessel's  parents  were  people  of  standing  in  Groningen, 
as  may  be  inferred  from  their  home  and  coat-of-arms,  as 
well  as  from  the  fact  that  his  mother  came  of  the  family  of 
Clantes,  later  very  prominent  in  the  affairs  of  the  city. 
Both  his  parents  died  while  he  was  still  a  child,  and  he  was 
taken  into  the  home  of  a  wealthy  relative,  named  Ottilia 
Clantes,  a  woman  conspicuous  for  her  many  virtues,  who 
had  him  educated  with  her  son.  The  boys  first  attended 
the  school  of  the  Brethren  of  the  Common  Life  in  Gronin- 
gen, where  from  the  very  outset  Wessel  displayed  singular 
industry  and  mental  alertness.  Very  soon,  however,  they 
were  transferred  to  the  better  school  of  the  Brethren  at 
Zwolle,  fifty  miles  to  the  south. 


44  Wessel  Gansfort 

This  was  one  of  the  two  original  communities  founded 
by  Gerhard  Groot,  and  was  at  the  time  distinguished  for 
the  thoroughness  of  its  instruction  and  the  number  of  its 
students.  The  curriculum  of  the  school  was  undeniably 
narrow,  even  when  judged  by  the  standards  of  the  times. 
Attention  was  concentrated  upon  the  study  of  the  Latin 
language  and  the  principles  of  the  Christian  religion  as  set 
forth  in  the  Scriptures  and  the  Fathers.  There  was  also 
some  instruction  in  what  Wessel's  earliest  biographer 
calls  "the  rudiments  of  the  arts."  Although  Zwolle  a 
few  decades  later  was  to  send  out  some  notable  Humanists, 
at  this  time  it  evidently  was  untouched  by  the  influence 
of  the  New  Learning  and  contributed  nothing  to  Wessel's 
later  interest  therein. 

The  impression  made  upon  him  by  this  school,  in  which 
he  was  what  we  would  call  a  boarding-pupil,  was  deep  and 
permanent.  He  was  taught  a  simple  fervid  piety,  and  was 
led  to  a  love  and  familiarity  with  the  Scriptures  which  was 
to  color  all  his  later  theological  thinking.  The  life  of  the 
school  community  was  simple  and  wholesome,  and  was 
pervaded  by  a  spirit  of  brotherliness  and  industry.  That 
Wessel  made  good  use  of  his  advantages  and  won  the 
confidence  of  the  officers  of  the  school  is  evident  from  the 
fact  that  during  the  latter  part  of  his  stay  he  was  appointed 
instructor  of  one  of  the  lower  classes.  His  success  as  a 
student  was  achieved  in  spite  of — or  perhaps  partly 
because  of — serious  bodily  infirmities.  His  eyes  were  not 
strong,  and  he  had  a  twisted  ankle  that  caused  him  to 
walk  with  a  limp.  It  has  been  suggested  by  one  of  his 
biographers  that  these  physical  defects  may  have  con- 
tributed "to  give  an  introverted  direction  to  his  mind,  and 
to  confirm  the  strength  and  independence  of  his  character 
in  opposition  to  the  world  without." 

Nothing  is  known  concerning  Wessel's  teachers  at 
Zwolle ;  but  he  there  came  under  the  influence  of  one  man 


Youth  45 

whom  we  count  among  the  Immortals.  It  was  none  other  "\ 
than  Thomas  a  Kempis,  to  whom  is  generally  attributed 
the  authorship  of  The  Imitation  of  Christ.  Thomas  had 
himself  been  brought  up  in  a  school  of  the  Brethren  at 
Deventer;  he  had  deeply  imbibed  their  principles  of 
devotion,  and  had  become  skilled  in  the  transcription  of 
the  Bible  and  other  books  of  religion.  Later  he  had 
entered  the  Augustinian  monastery  at  Mount  Saint 
Agnes,  where  he  took  priestly  orders,  and  was  made 
canon.  He  had  come  to  distinction  as  a  writer  and  as  a 
man  of  unusual  wisdom  and  piety,  and  his  counsel  was 
much  sought  by  young  men  outside  his  order.  It  was  not 
strange  that  a  serious  youth  such  as  Wessel  should  have 
sought  the  acquaintance  and  instruction  of  Thomas, 
especially  as  his  monastery  was  less  than  two  miles  from 
Zwolle,  and  that  something  like  friendship  should  have 
grown  up  between  this  saint  of  sixty  years  and  this  eager 
student  of  twenty.  Such  friendships  have  been  among 
the  most  fruitful  agencies  in  the  transmission  of  intel- 
lectual and  spiritual  energy  from  one  generation  to  an- 
other. For  to  the  zeal  of  the  teacher  there  is  added 
the  tender  interest  of  the  father,  while  a  filial  reverence 
and  affection  render  the  pupil  doubly  receptive  and 
loyal.  The  relation  between  Paul  and  Timothy  has  found 
repetition  times  innumerable  and  between  some  of  the 
rarest  spirits  in  the  history  of  the  Church. 

It  would  appear  that  at  this  time  Thomas  had  just  com- 
pleted or  was  engaged  in  writing  The  Imitation  of  Christ. 
The  reading  of  the  book  made  a  deep  impression  upon 
Wessel.  He  later  declared  that  it  gave  him  his  first  strong 
impulse  toward  piety  and  also  afforded  him  the  basis  of  a 
true  theology.  As  a  consequence  of  his  intimacy  with 
Thomas,  he  came  to  think  seriously  of  following  his 
master  into  the  monastic  life.  But  he  did  not  take  the 
decisive  step.     Not  even  his  devotion  to  his  revered 


46  Wessel  Gansfort 

counselor  could  overcome  his  innate  reluctance  to  enter 
a  life  whose  fundamental  virtues  were  obedience  to  a 
superior  and  exact  conformity  to  minute  regulations.  He 
was  by  nature  too  independent,  too  self-reliant  to  be 
suited  to  a  life  under  inflexible  rules.  And  besides  this,  his 
mind  revolted  from  the  superstitions  of  the  monks,  and 
their  mental  inertia.  He  must  be  free,  and  he  must  have 
opportunity  for  unrestricted  study.  The  contemplative 
life  had  afforded  Thomas  favorable  conditions  for  calm 
meditation  on  the  highest  themes,  for  the  study  of  the 
Bible  and  a  few  other  books,  for  his  beloved  labors  as  a 
copyist,  and  for  the  composition  of  his  devotional  works. 
His  love  of  the  cloister  is  well  expressed  in  his  declaration : 
"In  all  things  I  sought  quiet,  and  I  found  it  only  in  retire- 
ment and  in  study."  But  such  a  life  was  to  make  less  and 
less  appeal  to  Wessel,  and  in  the  end  he  became  a  strong 
opponent  of  monasticism.  It  was  an  indication  of  his 
early  independence  of  judgment  and  understanding  of 
himself  that  great  as  was  his  reverence  for  Thomas,  he  did 
not  respond  to  his  invitation  to  enter  the  cloister  life. 
Unlike  Luther  he  did  not  feel  that  he  could  not  live  a 
religious  life  out  in  the  world,  and  that  he  must  enter  a 
convent  to  save  his  soul. 

In  speaking  of  the  influence  which  Thomas  exerted 
upon  Wessel,  not  only  during  his  youth,  but  throughout  his 
whole  life,  Ullmann  draws  this  suggestive  contrast  between 
teacher  and  pupil:  "In  Thomas  piety  and  devotion 
greatly  predominated.  With  an  irresistible  predilection, 
he  plunged  into  the  contemplation  of  divine  things. 
Satisfied  with  Scripture  and  a  few  good  books,  unconcerned 
with  the  changes  of  systems  taking  place  on  the  arena  of 
science,  and  with  no  wish  to  reform  the  ecclesiastical 
statutes,  he  was  perfectly  content,  when  under  all  the 
restraints  that  the  Church  imposed,  he  was  able  to  win 
the  hearts  of  men  to  the  love  of  God.    In  Wessel,  on  the 


Youth  47 

contrary,  the  thirst  for  knowledge  and  the  taste  for  action 
greatly  predominated,  without  impairing  the  piety  of  his 
heart.  His  desire  was  to  master  everything  the  age 
afforded  as  worthy  of  being  known.  He  learned  languages, 
changed  systems,  vigorously  fought  his  way  in  the  world, 
disputed,  strove,  contradicted  the  reigning  opinions,  and 
burned  with  desire  to  apply  his  hand  to  the  improvement 
and  reformation  of  the  corrupt  state  of  the  Church." 

His  earliest  biographer  informs  us  that  "from  his  boy- 
hood he  had  always  something  singular  and  inwardly 
repugnant  to  all  superstition."  This  appears  in  his 
relations  with  Thomas,  who  held  the  medieval  notions  as 
to  the  value  of  the  intercession  of  the  Virgin.  When,  on 
one  occasion,  he  was  urging  upon  Wessel  the  cultivation  of 
devotion  to  her,  he  is  said  to  have  received  this  reply: 
"Father,  why  do  you  not  rather  lead  me  to  Christ,  who  so 
graciously  invites  those  who  labor  and  are  heavy-laden 
to  come  unto  him?"  The  students  in  the  schools  of  the 
Brethren  were  accustomed  to  a  rather  austere  life,  but  fast- 
i  ing  was  not  required  of  them.  Upon  this,  however,  Thomas 
( placed  great  emphasis  and  he  urged  it  upon  Wessel,  who 
thus  expressed  his  conception  of  true  Christian  asceti- 
cism: "God  grant  that  I  may  always  live  in  purity  and 
temperance,  and  fast  from  all  sin  and  crime." 

Hardenberg  is  authority  for  the  statement  that,  as  a 
consequence  of  Wessel 's  expressed  dissent  from  certain 
statements  in  The  Imitation  of  Christ,  which  to  his  more 
practical  and  critical  mind  seemed  objectionable,  Thomas 
so  revised  them  that  the  book  when  published  showed 
"fewer  traces  of  human  superstition."  There  is  nothing 
inherently  improbable  in  this.  Freedom  in  the  expression 
of  his  opinion  was  one  of  Wessel's  most  prominent  traits. 
And  doubtless  Thomas  recognized  his  unusual  mental 
power  and  discrimination,  or  he  would  not  have  admitted 
him  to  such  intimacy.     The  incident  also  receives  support 


48  Wessel  Gansfort 

in  the  fact  that  this  work  is  less  marred  by  monastic 
superstitions  than  his  other  works. 

Very  few  incidents  in  Wessel's  Hfe  at  ZwoUe  have  been 
preserved.  It  was  a  time  of  great  prosperity  in  the  brother- 
hood. The  number  of  laymen  and  clergymen  composing 
the  order,  together  with  the  students  in  the  school,  was  so 
great  that  they  were  obliged  to  occupy  a  number  of 
different  buildings.  In  one  of  the  smaller  of  these,  The 
Little  House,  Wessel  and  fifty  other  students  lived  under 
their  Procurator,  Rutger  von  Doetenghen.  The  life  was 
semi-monastic,  the  students  as  well  as  the  older  members 
wore  a  monk-like  habit,  and  were  tonsured.  Each  had  his 
cell,  and  each  his  appointed  duties.  Even  after  he  became 
one  of  the  teachers,  Wessel  is  said  to  have  assisted  the 
Procurator  in  preparing  the  whey  for  the  students'  meals. 
Paulus  Pelantinus,  a  friend  of  Wessel,  has  thus  in  his 
Epicedium  described  him  in  the  monkish  garb  which  he 
could  not  have  altogether  loved : 

"Humbly  he  moved  about  with  cowled  head 
And  body  covered  with  the  yellow  robe. 
While  his  unshaven  face  a  veil  concealed." 

Among  his  fellows  in  The  Little  House  was  a  gifted 
youth  from  Cologne,  an  accomplished  painter,  whose 
strong  religious  bent  had  led  him  to  join  the  Brethren. 
His  cell  was  beside  that  of  Wessel,  and  they  were  accus- 
tomed— contrary  to  the  rules,  no  doubt — to  talk  through 
a  hole  in  the  wall  that  separated  them.  They  became 
intimate  friends,  and  as  is  so  often  the  case  in  student 
friendships,  each  contributed  something  to  the  develop- 
ment of  the  other.  Wessel  taught  his  friend  such  secular 
knowledge  as  he  possessed,  and  in  return  received  from  his 
maturer  companion  "instruction  in  the  fear  and  love  of 
God." 


Youth  49 

It  has  already  been  noticed  that  the  officers  of  the 
school  manifested  their  confidence  in  Wessel's  scholarship 
and  character  by  appointing  him  one  of  the  under- 
masters  or  lectors.  He  was  then  a  senior,  and  taught  the 
second  class  below  him.  It  was  perhaps  in  this  position  as 
teacher,  at  any  rate  it  was  during  the  latter  part  of  his 
stay  at  Zwolle,  that  he  developed  views  and  manifested  a 
bold  independence  of  mind  that  exposed  him  to  criticism, 
or,  perhaps,  just  student  teasing.  As  a  consequence,  he  is 
said  to  have  written  a  defense  of  his  positions,  and  to  have 
left  the  school  sooner  than  he  might  otherwise  have  done. 
The  incident  has  interest  as  indicating  his  early  disposition 
to  do  his  own  thinking  and  express  and  defend  his  views. 
It  was  prophetic  of  his  whole  academic  career. 

Zwolle  was  not  in  any  sense  a  preparatory  school  for 
admission  to  a  university.  The  course  there  had  its  own 
definite  purpose,  largely  religious,  and  quite  distinct  from 
any  system  of  professional  training.  Wessel  was  probably 
in  the  early  twenties  when  he  left  Zwolle,  and  he  had 
completed,  or  nearly  completed,  the  course  of  instruction 
there  given.  Yet  when  he  came  to  Cologne,  he  did  not  at 
once  enter  the  university,  but  one  of  the  preparatory 
schools  organically  connected  with  it.  The  Netherlands 
then  possessed  a  university  of  its  own,  that  at  Louvain; 
but  it  was  still  a  comparatively  new  institution,  having 
been  founded  in  1425.  It  was  already  leading  a  vigorous 
life,  but  it  lacked  the  distinction  that  attached  to  Cologne, 
where  some  of  the  great  masters  in  theology  and  philo- 
sophy had  studied  or  taught.  But  besides  its  illustrious 
name,  Cologne  held  another  attraction  for  Wessel.  It 
offered  him  a  scholarship.  A  native  of  Groningen,  named 
Laurentius  Berungen,  who  was  a  professor  of  theology  in 
the  university  and  a  canon  in  the  cathedral,  had  in  1440 
founded  a  bursary,  or  we  might  say,  provided  livings, 
for   students  from   Groningen.     It   was  known   as   the 

VOL.  I — 4 


50  Wessel  Gansfort 

Laurence   Bursary,    and    to   its   privileges   Wessel   was 
admitted  on  his  coming  to  Cologne. 

The  medieval  university  had  resulted  from  the  desire  to 
provide  instruction  wider  in  range  and  more  efficient  in 
method  than  that  given  by  the  two  types  of  school, 
cathedral  and  monastic,  which  had  preserved  the  meager 
learning  of  the  Dark  Ages.  These  had,  in  the  main,  con- 
tented themselves  with  the  giving  of  such  instruction  as 
was  needed  by  the  priest  and  the  monk.  But  the  introduc- 
tion of  new  studies  and  new  methods  of  teaching,  together 
with  the  need  of  some  adequate  form  of  organization  for 
the  rapidly  growing  scholastic  communities,  led  to  the 
organization  of  the  university.  The  steps  by  which  the 
earlier  schools  attained  to  this  form  of  organization  were 
not  in  every  case  the  same.  But  usually  a  school  had 
grown  to  considerable  size  and  to  recognized  importance 
before  it  obtained,  from  the  pope  or  monarch,  the  charter 
which  conferred  upon  it  the  privileges  of  a  university. 
There  were  two  original  types  of  university,  that  of  Paris, 
and  that  of  Bologna,  and  after  one  or  the  other  of  these 
all  the  later  medieval  universities  were  modeled.  It  is 
difficult  to  determine  which  was  the  older,  but  the  Magna 
fCharta  of  the  Parisian  school  was  given  by  a  papal  bull  of 
iGregory  IX  in  1231.  That  gave  to  the  large  scholastic 
community  which  had  grown  about  the  cathedral  of 
Notre  Dame  the  powers  and  privileges  of  a  corporation. 
It  is  interesting  to  recall  that  the  original  conception  of  a 
university  was  that  of  a  guild,  or  artificial  brotherhood. 
Each  craft,  each  form  of  merchandise  had  its  own  guild. 
There  were  guilds  also  for  the  promotion  of  interests  of  all 
sorts,  from  the  cultivation  of  religion  to  the  maintenance 
of  a  city's  defenses.  It  was  through  membership  in  a 
guild  that  the  ordinary  individual  obtained  protection  and 
citizen  rights.  This  was  the  most  common  form  of  social 
and  industrial  organization. 


Youth  51 

Hence,  when  the  members  of  the  teaching  force  in  the 
school  that  had  grown  up  about  the  cathedral  in  Paris, 
and  the  mature  foreign  students  in  the  law-school  at 
Bologna,  felt  that  they  needed  the  protection  and  the 
privileges  that  organization  would  afford  them,  they 
sought  to  have  themselves  chartered  by  the  secular  or  the 
ecclesiastical  authority  as  an  academic  guild.  In  Paris,  it 
was  the  professors  who  became  thus  organized.  They 
were  constituted  as  a  guild  of  masters  in  the  teacher's 
craft.  The  students  were  later  included  in  the  guild  or 
university  privileges  as  apprentices  in  the  scholar's  trade. 
Among  these  privileges  was  exemption  from  the  control 
of  the  local  authorities,  from  certain  taxes,  and  from 
military  service.  The  guild  of  teachers  had  the  powers  of  a 
corporation ;  it  could  receive  gifts  and  legacies  and  defend 
itself  in  the  courts.  As  an  institution  chartered  by  the 
pope  the  University  of  Paris  had  the  right  to  give  to  its 
graduates  a  diploma  conferring  on  them  "the  right  to 
teach  anywhere."  In  the  academic  guild,  graduation 
corresponded  to  the  admission  of  the  apprentice  to  the 
privileges  of  a  master  craftsman. 

The  typical  university  consisted  of  the  four  faculties  of 
arts,  theology,  medicine,  and  law.  At  the  head  of  each 
faculty  was  a  dean,  while  an  annually  elected  rector  was 
the  highest  executive  officer  of  the  academic  community. 
In  Paris,  the  faculty  of  theology  overshadowed  all  the 
others;  and  for  centuries,  students  of  theology  in  all  parts 
of  Europe  aimed  to  complete  their  studies  at  Paris.  It  is 
indicative  of  the  backwardness  of  Germany  that  a  score 
of  schools  in  Italy  and  France  and  two  in  England  had 
been  chartered  as  universities,  before  the  first  German 
school,  that  of  Prague,  in  1347,  attained  to  this  stage  of 
development.  It  soon  counted  its  students  by  the  thou- 
sand, for  Bohemia  was  then  the  most  highly  civilized  and 
prosperous  state  in  the  Empire. 


52  Wessel  Gansfort 

It  was  forty  years  after  the  founding  of  the  University 
of  Prague  that  the  school  in  Cologne,  which  under  the 
supervision  of  the  Dominicans  had  already  gained  a  wide 
reputation,  was  at  the  desire  of  the  city  council  given  the 
rank  of  a  university.  It  received  its  charter  in  1388  from 
Pope  Urban  VI,  in  whose  pontificate  the  papal  schism 
began.  Apparently,  the  emperor  took  little  interest  in  the 
school.  But  the  popes  continued  to  show  it  special  favor 
and  give  it  financial  assistance,  with  the  natural  result 
that  the  institution  became  and  remained  ultramontane 
in  sympathy  and  allegiance. 

The  city  of  Cologne  was  one  of  the  most  important  in 
Germany.  Its  bishop  was  the  foremost  of  the  ecclesiastical 
electors,  and  took  rank  with  the  great  secular  princes.  It 
was  a  member  of  the  Hanseatic  League,  with  a  commerce 
that  caused  it  to  be  compared  with  Venice.  Within  its 
walls  converged  the  various  interests  of  the  populous 
Rhine  valley.  Its  citizens  were  distinguished  not  in 
manufacture  and  trade  alone,  but  in  the  arts  and  sciences 
and  in  aspiration  after  popular  liberty.  Ullmann  has 
thus  characterized  the  conflicting  intellectual  forces  which 
there  met:  "In  Cologne,  the  most  subtle  scholasticism 
met  with  the  most  devout  mysticism ;  the  strictest  ortho- 
doxy with  the  boldest  heresy;  the  extreme  bigotry  and 
ecclesiastical  legality  of  monachism  with  the  most 
licentious  anti-nomianism  of  fanatics  and  enemies  of 
the  Church." 

Even  before  it  became  a  university,  the  theological 
school  at  Cologne  had  given  distinction  to  the  city.  Al- 
bertus  Magnus,  "Doctor  Universalis,"  who  to  his  theologi- 
cal learning  added  a  knowledge  of  the  natural  sciences 
which  caused  him  to  be  popularly  regarded  as  a  sorcerer, 
had  spent  most  of  his  life  in  the  school  there.  One  of  his 
pupils  and  his  successor  at  Cologne  was  Thomas  Aquinas, 
in  some  respects  the  greatest  of  the  medieval  theologians. 


Youth  53 

Duns  Scotus  had  also  taught  there,  having  gone  thither 
from  Paris. 

The  close  relation  between  the  city  and  the  university  is 
indicated  by  the  fact  that  four  of  the  burgomasters  were  its 
standing  wardens,  and  the  town  council  and  the  citizens 
contributed  to  its  support.  The  university  was,  in  a  sense, 
the  daughter  of  that  of  Paris,  with  all  whose  rights  and 
privileges  it  was  invested  by  the  papal  charter.  It  was 
self-governing,  independent  of  the  local  authorities;  and 
for  a  time  at  least  even  its  students  were  exempted  frorn^ 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  civil  courts.  The  theological 
faculty,  which  was  by  far  the  strongest,  numbered  as 
many  as  twenty-six  doctors  and  twenty  licentiates.  It 
had  fine  apartments  and  enjoyed  special  prestige  as  the 
one  theological  school  in  the  archbishopric. 

Entrance  into  a  university  usually  admits  a  boy  to  a 
larger  life.  It  must  have  been  so  with  Wessel.  Cologne 
was  a  metropolis  compared  with  provincial  Groningen  and 
ZwoUe.  Here  all  the  tides  of  life  were  at  the  full.  And  the 
great  university,  with  its  freedom,  with  its  mature  students 
from  many  lands,  with  its  various  faculties  and  many 
courses  of  study,  was  in  sharp  contrast  with  the  quiet, 
semi-monastic,  and  undeniably  narrow  schools  of  the 
Brethren,  in  which  he  had  hitherto  studied.  No  doubt  an 
ambitious  youth  such  as  Wessel  experienced  a  quickening 
of  his  intellectual  energies  as  he  entered  into  the  larger  and 
intenser  life  of  the  city  and  the  university. 

The  chronology  of  Wessel 's  life  is  still  an  unsolved 
problem,  and  it  is  impossible  to  ascertain  just  how  many 
years  he  spent  at  Cologne ;  but  it  appears  probable  that  he 
remained  there  till  he  was  thirty  or  a  little  past.  We  have 
no  detailed  record  of  his  university  career.  His  industry, 
his  remarkable  powers  of  acquisition,  and  the  fertility  and 
independence  of  his  mind  revealed  themselves  here  even 
more  than  at  Zwolle.     He  readily  obtained  the  master's 


54  Wessel  Gansfort 

degree  in  literature  and  the  arts,   and  eagerly  applied 
himself  to  the  study  of  philosophy  and  theology. 

Theology  was  unquestionably  "queen  of  the  sciences"  at 
Cologne,  for  in  that  subject  the  university  was  esteemed 
second  only  to  Paris  and  Prague.  But  the  spirit  in  which 
it  was  conceived  and  the  method  of  its  teaching  were 
far  from  satisfactory  to  Wessel's  free  and  critical  mind. 
He  felt  keenly  its  inadequacy  at  the  time,  and  in  later 
life  often  took  occasion  to  refer  disparagingly  to  it. 
Theology  was  there  presented  not  as  a  reverent  search 
for  the  truth  relative  to  the  nature  of  God,  but  as  an  exact 
science,  whose  boundaries  were  sharply  drawn,  and  whose 
methods  were  those  of  syllogistic  certainty.  The  creative 
period  of  Albert  and  Duns  Scotus  had  been  followed  by 
one  of  intolerant  dogmatism,  of  rigid  and  persecuting 
orthodoxy.  The  theological  teachers  had  not  kept 
abreast  of  the  thinking  of  the  period.  They  had  not 
profited  by  the  liberal  mysticism  of  Tauler  and  his 
followers,  nor  had  they  endeavored  to  possess  themselves 
of  the  elements  of  truth  in  Eckart's  pantheistic  specula- 
tions. They  had  learned  nothing  from  the  existence  and 
criticism  of  the  Brethren  of  the  Free  Spirit  and  other  anti- 
ecclesiastical  movements.  The  various  evangelical  in- 
fluences of  the  age,  which  came  to  their  fullest  expression 
in  the  Hussite  reformation,  had  no  other  effect  upon  the 
teachers  of  theology  at  Cologne  than  to  arouse  their 
suspicion  and  inquisitorial  zeal.  One  of  their  representa- 
tives was  chief  prosecutor  in  the  trial  of  John  of  Wesel 
for  heresy  and  association  with  the  Jews  and  Hussites. 
Another  framed  a  famous  handbook  for  the  detection 
and  conviction  of  witches;  while  the  obscurantist  atti- 
tude of  the  university  was  to  be  strikingly  displayed  a 
generation  later  by  its  violent  opposition  to  Reuchlin  and 
the  New  Learning.  It  was  the  boast  of  Laurentius,  the 
founder  of  the  Groningen  fellowships,  that  at  the  martyr- 


Youth  55 

dom  of  Huss  at  Constance,  he  had  pushed  that  Christian 
hero  back  into  the  fire! 

Theology  at  Cologne  had  gone  to  seed.  The  professors 
had  nothing  more  stimulating  to  offer  than  extracts  from 
Albertus  Magnus  and  Thomas  Aquinas,  which  they 
interpreted  and  elaborated.  There  was  little  or  no  appeal 
to  Scripture  and  no  effort  to  acquaint  the  student  with 
the  rich  treasures  of  the  patristic  literature.  Wessel  found 
little  satisfaction  in  the  exercises  of  the  theological  class- 
room. The  lectures  that  he  attended  raised  difficulties 
rather  than  solved  them,  while  the  studies  that  he  was 
carrying  on  independently  made  him  the  more  impatient 
with  the  inadequacy  of  the  class-room  presentation  of 
difficult  matters.  It  was  no  wonder  that  he  astonished  his 
fellow-students  and  perplexed  his  teachers  by  the  many 
bold  questions  with  which  he  plied  them. 

As  has  been  the  case  with  many  another  earnest  student, 
dissatisfaction  with  the  exercises  of  the  lecture-hall  drove 
Wessel  to  extensive  reading  and  independent  research. 
To  such  a  man  the  university  library  is  worth  much  more 
than  the  faculty.  Wessel  became  an  extensive  reader  in 
the  libraries  of  Cologne,  especially  in  that  of  the  Benedic- 
tines. Among  the  writers  that  left  a  deep  impression 
upon  him  was  a  twelfth-century  abbot  of  the  little  town  of 
Deutz  just  across  the  Rhine  from  Cologne.  He  spent 
much  time  in  the  convent  library  there.  Its  learned  abbot, 
Rupert,  had  written  extensively  on  theological  subjects. 
He  had  manifested  a  reverent  dependence  upon  the  Scrip- 
tures as  the  chief  source  of  divine  truth,  and  he  had 
indulged  great  freedom  of  speculation  regarding  matters 
that  had  since  been  fixed  by  the  authority  of  such  great 
teachers  as  Thomas  Aquinas.  Rupert  was  also  a  man  of 
earnest  practical  piety,  and  had  boldly  condemned  the 
abuses  in  the  Church  and  the  corruptions  in  the  monastic 
life  of  his  time.    His  writings  tended  to  confirm  Wessel  in 


56  Wessel  Gansfort 

his  allegiance  to  the  Scriptures  as  indispensable  to  the 
theologian,  and  emboldened  him  in  his  criticism  of  the 
current  doctrines  and  customs  of  the  Church.  It  is  said 
that  it  was  Rupert's  influence  that  first  led  Wessel  to 
abandon  "the  Church's  fiction  of  transubstantiation." 

The  university  gave  no  encouragement  and  afforded  no 
opportunity  for  humanistic  studies.  A  student  who  was 
at  Cologne  somewhat  later  than  Wessel  states,  in  a 
humorous  poem,  that  there  "no  one  could  teach  Latin 
correctly,  or  lecture  soundly  on  Rhetoric  or  Poetry,  and 
that  Virgil  and  Cicero  were  as  contemptuously  despised  as 
swines'  flesh  by  Jews."  Yet  in  the  libraries  in  Cologne 
were  the  materials  for  an  acquaintance  with  at  least 
some  of  the  ancient  classic  writers,  for  Wessel  began 
there  the  studies  which  later  rendered  him  famous  as  a 
Humanist. 

Before  the  invention  of  printing,  the  copying  of  a  much 
desired  book  by  a  student  was  a  not  unusual  thing.  Even 
after  printed  books  had  come  somewhat  into  use,  we  read 
of  Zwingli  making  with  his  own  hand  a  copy  of  the  Pauline 
Epistles  from  Erasmus'  recently  issued  edition  of  the  New 
Testament.  This  he  did  that  he  might  have  the  letters  in 
the  original,  and  in  a  portable  form.  It  was  an  indication 
of  Wessel's  scholarly  interest  and  industry  that  he  early 
formed  the  habit  of  making  extensive  excerpts  from 
the  authors  that  he  read.  His  training  as  a  copyist  in  the 
schools  of  the  Brethren,  doubtless,  rendered  this  task  the 
less  irksome  to  him.  While  at  Cologne  he  began  a  collec- 
tion of  miscellaneous  quotations,  with  comments  of  his 
own.  It  contained  passages  from  Greek  and  Latin  authors, 
especially  the  Fathers,  and  from  later  philosophical 
writers.  The  collection  grew  with  the  years,  and  Wessel 
carried  its  many  volumes  about  with  him  when  he  traveled. 
It  was  an  armory  from  which  he  took  the  weapons  needed 
in  his  forensic  encounters.    Half  humorously  he  called  it 


;{>;A^  i.i  -1  v^'.'.-y 


One  of  the  Many  Gates  to  Mediaeval  Groningen 


Youth  57 

"The  Great  Sea"  as  if  it  were  formed  of  streams  from  all 
lands. 

Not  least  among  the  accomplishments  of  his  years  at 
Cologne  was  the  acquaintance  which  he  there  gained  with 
the  Greek  and  the  Hebrew  languages.  There  were  at  the 
time  no  facilities  for  such  studies  offered  by  the  university. 
Wessel  was  however  able  to  obtain  tutors.  Turkish 
invasion  was  already  driving  Byzantine  scholars  into 
Europe.  Two  such  refugees,  Greek  monks,  had  found 
asylum  at  Cologne ;  and  it  was  from  them  that  he  acquired 
his  first  knowledge  of  the  Greek  tongue.  Hebrew  he 
learned  from  some  educated  Jews  in  Cologne  or  its  vicin- 
ity. The  knowledge  of  Greek  and  Hebrew  was  such  an 
unusual  thing  at  the  time  that  it  constituted  its  possessor 
a  marked  man,  and  in  Wessel's  case  it  provoked  many 
incredible  tales  as  to  his  wonderful  linguistic  accomplish- 
ments, tales  that  suggest  Borrow' s  pretentious  title: 
Metrical  Translations  from  Thirty  Languages.  These 
stories  we  may  well  dismiss  as  apocryphal,  for  at  the  time 
it  constituted  Wessel  a  sufficient  marvel  to  be  known  as 
"a  three-language  man." 

While  he  may  have  undertaken  these  studies  in  order  to 
read  the  Scriptures  in  the  original,  yet  his  desire  for  an 
accurate  knowledge  of  the  Greek  philosophers  also  in- 
fluenced him  in  the  same  direction.  For  in  connection 
with  the  scholastic  theology  he  had  been  led  to  an  acquaint- 
ance with  the  Greek  sages,  especially  Aristotle  and  Plato, 
from  whose  diverse  spirit  and  modes  of  thought  the  two 
leading  parties  in  current  theological  discussion  took 
their  rise.  He  early  manifested  a  strong  preference 
for  the  Platonic  philosophy,  from  the  same  considera- 
tion, doubtless,  that  influenced  the  Greek  Fathers,  viz :  its 
idealism  and  points  of  obvious  contact  with  Christian 
truth.  In  the  contests  between  the  Realists  and  the 
Nominalists  he  had  aligned  himself  with  the  former.    By 


58  Wessel  Gansfort 

much  study  of  the  subject  and  by  frequent  discussions 
with  his  teachers  and  his  fellows,  he  had  acquired  such 
skill  and  confidence  in  debate  that  he  felt  disposed  to 
champion  the  cause  of  the  Realists  in  the  contests  which 
were  then  raging  at  the  University  of  Paris.  Thither  he 
was  now  to  turn  his  steps,  and  so  enter  upon  the  second 
period  of  his  life. 

His  years  at  Cologne  had  not  cooled  his  early  piety.  He 
was  still  preeminently  interested  in  religion.  His  interest 
in  the  Bible,  his  dislike  of  the  theological  instruction  of  his 
day,  his  study  of  the  languages,  his  wide  reading  in  ancient 
literature,  his  eagerness  in  debate,  these  were  all  expres- 
sions of  an  ardent  religious  life  and  an  alert,  resolute 
mind 


CHAPTER   IV 

HIS  EARLY  MANHOOD 

If  Wessel,  in  deciding  to  leave  Cologne,  had  intended  to 
proceed  at  once  to  Paris,  he  was  to  meet  with  unexpected 
detention.  The  reputation  which  he  had  already  won  for 
ability  and  scholarship  resulted  in  his  being  called  to  a 
chair  of  theological  instruction  in  the  neighboring  Uni- 
versity of  Heidelberg.  The  invitation  came  in  the  name 
of  the  count  of  the  Palatinate,  who  was  interested  in 
building  up  the  school  in  his  capital  city.  The  position  was 
offered  upon  advantageous  terms  and  presented  a  favor- 
able opportunity  to  begin  the  career  of  a  teacher.  It 
would  have  given  Wessel  academic  standing,  and  would 
have  provided  him  with  an  assured  means  of  support. 
But  at  this  time,  he  was  more  concerned  to  continue  his 
studies  under  new  masters  than  to  devote  himself  to  the 
instruction  of  others.  And  as  for  the  question  of  financial 
support,  that  does  not  seem  ever  to  have  been  a  matter  of 
grave  concern  with  Wessel,  who  may  have  had  some 
personal  income  from  his  parents'  estate.  At  any  rate, 
he  was  not  driven  to  teach  for  a  livelihood ;  nor  do  we  find 
him  pursuing  patrons  and  pleading  poverty,  as  was 
Erasmus'  custom.  Later  in  life,  Wessel  was  again  to  be  ^ 
called  to  Heidelberg  and  was  to  exert  an  important 
influence  in  the  affairs  of  the  university,  but  now  he 
thought  it  best  to  decHne  the  Elector's  tempting  offer. 
The  theological  department  at  Paris  then  exerted  a 
centripetal  energy  greater  than  any  one  school  of  the 

59 


6o  Wessel  Gansfort 

present  day,  and  Wessel  in  common  with  all  other  ambi- 
tious divinity  students  felt  its  powerful  attraction. 

But  although  Paris  was  the  goal  of  his  desire,  he  did  not 
go  thither  at  once.  Instead,  he  took  testimonials  from  the 
university  at  Cologne  as  to  the  period  of  his  study  and  his 
standing  as  a  scholar  there,  and  with  these  presented 
himself  for  admission  at  the  university  at  Louvain.  This 
young  institution  had  in  the  decade  or  more  that  Wessel 
had  been  at  Cologne  made  great  progress  in  its  theologi- 
cal department,  having  in  the  oft-expressed  judgment  of 
Wessel  excelled  the  older  university  in  the  development  of 
a  liberal  and  scientific  spirit.  In  the  following  century, 
however,  it  was  to  undergo  a  decline  and  become  reaction- 
ary ;  and  with  Cologne  it  was  to  unite  in  opposition  to 
the  New  Learning  and  the  evangelical  movement.  But  at 
this  time  its  freer  atmosphere  proved  very  congenial  to 
Wessel's  enquiring  mind,  and  he  enjoyed  his  intercourse 
with  its  professors  and  profited  by  his  brief  stay  there.  He 
had,  apparently,  felt  the  need  of  having  another  view- 
point than  that  of  Cologne,  before  venturing  into  the 
sharp  intellectual  contests  of  the  Parisian  school.  It  is 
impossible  to  ascertain  how  long  Wessel  remained  at 
Louvain,  but  probably  not  more  than  a  year;  for  he 
reached  Paris  sometime  before  1454.  He  was  then  about 
thirty-four  years  of  age. 

As  Paris  for  the  next  fifteen  years  and  more  may  be 
regarded  as  his  home,  and  studying  and  teaching  there  his 
chief  employment,  we  are  naturally  interested  in  the 
condition  of  the  city  and  the  state  of  the  university, 
especially  its  theological  department  in  which  Wessel 
sought  instruction.  To-day,  all  roads  in  France  lead  to 
Paris.  It  sets  the  standards  of  thought  and  the  fashion 
in  dress  and  manners.  But  in  the  fifteenth  century  Paris 
did  not  occupy  this  unique  position.  There  were  rival 
provincial   capitals  with   their  ducal   and  archiepiscopal 


Early  Manhood  6i 

courts.  However,  Paris  enjoyed  the  distinction  of  a  long 
and  honorable  history. 

Clovis  had  made  it  his  capital,  and  though  it  lost  its 
political  prominence  during  the  period  of  the  Carlovin- 
gians,  under  Hugh  Capet  and  his  successors  it  became 
again  the  leading  city  of  the  realm.  This  proud  position, 
during  all  the  vicissitudes  that  accompanied  the  break- 
down of  the  feudal  system  and  the  long  conflict  with 
England,  Paris  never  lost.  At  the  beginning  of  the 
fourteenth  century  Philip  the  Fair  had  made  it  the  seat 
of  the  "Parlement,"  the  highest  court  of  the  nation.  And 
with  the  unification  of  the  French  states  under  Louis  XI 
it  became  the  abode  of  a  strong  centralized  government — 
a  true  national  capital. 

During  Wessel's  residence  there,  Paris  had  a  popula- 
tion approximating  two  hundred  and  fifty  thousand.  It 
was  already  adorned  by  many  of  the  architectural  monu- 
ments that  still  excite  admiration.  Northern  France  was 
the  birthplace  of  Gothic  architecture,  and  the  city  then 
possessed  such  noble  examples  of  that  style  of  structure  as 
Notre  Dame  and  the  Sainte  Chapelle,  besides  many  others 
of  less  distinction.  The  main  streets  of  the  city  had  been 
paved  since  the  reign  of  Philip  Augustus.  But  the 
dwelling-houses  were  huddled  close  together;  the  streets 
and  alleys  were  veiy  narrow,  and  were  unlighted  at  night 
save  for  the  tapers  that  burned  before  the  image  of  the 
Virgin  at  the  street  corners.  Those  venturing  out  at  night 
carried  a  torch  or  lantern  and  went  prepared  for  attack. 
Street  brawls  and  robberies  were  common,  and  the  presence 
of  several  thousand  students,  exempt  from  police  jurisdic- 
tion, did  not  contribute  to  the  orderliness  of  the  city. 

Politically  prominent  as  Paris  was,  it  had  long  enjoyed 
an  even  greater  prominence  in  the  educational  world. 
Its  Cathedral  School  under  royal  patronage  and  the 
administration  of  able  bishops  had  won  distinction  even 


62  Wessel  Gansfort 

before  it  was  chartered  as  a  university  by  Pope  Innocent 
III  at  the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth  century.  It  had 
been  favored  by  the  services  of  some  notable  educators, 
among  whom  were  William  of  Champeaux  and  his  more 
distinguished  pupil  and  successor,  Abelard,  whose  brilliant 
career  marked  an  epoch  in  the  history  of  education.  It 
was  the  leading  school  in  northern  Europe,  and  in  theology 
the  foremost  in  the  world.  As  has  been  noticed  already, 
it  possessed  the  distinction  of  being  the  first  school  to  be 
organized  as  a  "University  of  Masters,"  and  was  the 
model  after  which  all  the  northern  universities  were  to  be 
framed.  It  was  a  corporation  of  professors  and  students, 
"  Universitas  Magistrorum  et  Scholarium."  Though 
complex  in  its  inner  organization,  it  was  divided  along 
large  lines  into  two  kinds  of  groups  or  circles.  So  far  as 
the  subject  of  their  study  was  concerned,  the  members  of 
the  university  separated  themselves  into  four  sections,  or 
faculties,  those  of  Arts,  of  Theology,  of  Canon  Law,  and  of 
Medicine.  But  the  members  of  the  university  were  also 
segregated  with  reference  to  the  region  from  which 
they  came.  These  national  clubs  with  their  separate 
club-houses  or  dormitories  were  known  as  Nations.  The 
organizations  among  the  foreign  students  in  some  of  our 
larger  institutions  afford  us  a  hint  as  to  the  character 
of  these  associations  of  men  of  similar  nationality.  In 
Paris  at  this  time  there  were  four  of  these  Nations: 
French,  Picard,  Norman,  and  German.  These  national 
groups  were,  with  the  exception  of  that  of  the  Normans, 
subdivided  into  smaller  or  provincial  circles.  For  ex- 
ample, within  the  German  Nation  there  were  three 
divisions,  one  for  the  Germans  proper,  another  for  the 
Netherlanders,  a  third  for  the  English.  One  would  expect 
that  Wessel  as  a  Dutchman  would  have  joined  the  German 
Nation,  but  according  to  a  custom  of  the  university, 
following  an  earlier  political  division,  the  Netherlands  were 


Early  Manhood  63 

counted  as  a  part  of  Picardy,  so  Wessel  became  a  member 
of  the  Picard  Nation.  It  was  doubtless  because  of  this 
arbitrary  arrangement  that  John  of  Picardy  became  for  a 
time  one  of  Wessel's  main  instructors. 

Just  at  this  time  the  university  of  Paris  was  enjoying  its 
greatest  prosperity.  There  were  other  noble  schools  in 
France,  but  that  at  Paris  was  the  pride  of  the  whole 
nation.  This  was  partly  due  to  its  illustrious  past, 
but  more  to  the  fact  that  it  was  the  school  at  the  national 
capital,  patronized  by  the  king  and  fostered  by  the  pope, 
and  on  nice  points  of  theology  and  canon  law  appealed 
to  by  princes  and  prelates  in  all  Christendom.  The 
theological  department  under  the  leadership  of  the  Sor- 
bonne,  its  most  distinguished  school,  had  become  a  kind  of 
court  of  last  resort  in  theological  contentions,  and  a  rival 
authority  to  the  pope  himself.  The  university  was  often 
spoken  of  as  "the  Eldest  Daughter  of  the  King, "  and  the 
monarchs  sometimes  expressed  their  concern  for  its 
welfare  by  interfering  in  its  management.  While  Wessel 
was  in  Paris  Louis  XI,  in  an  edict  designed  to  place 
Nominalism  under  royal  embargo,  thus  addressed  the 
university  authorities:  "But  chiefly  is  the  Faculty  of 
Theology  in  Paris  extolled,  which  like  a  brilliant  star  has, 
by  the  splendor  of  its  rays,  kindled  and  illumined,  not 
only  our  kingdom,  but  the  whole  world." 

While,  as  in  other  universities,  the  largest  numbers  were 
in  the  department  of  Arts,  which  was  in  a  sense  preparatory 
to  the  other  departments,  yet,  as  already  implied,  the 
theological  faculty  overshadowed  all  the  others,  and 
dominated  the  policy  of  the  institution.  This  had  been 
the  case  for  a  century  or  more.  During  the  seventy  years 
that  the  popes  resided  at  Avignon  the  papacy  became 
almost  an  appanage  of  the  French  monarch.  All  the  more 
desirable  positions  in  the  gift  of  the  Church,  with  their 
influence  and  revenue,  were  within  easy  reach  of  ambitious 


64  Wessel  Gansfort 

Frenchmen.  But  one  of  the  chief  prerequisites  for  the 
ascent  of  the  ecclesiastical  ladder  was  training  in  theology 
and  canon  law,  especially  the  former.  As  a  consequence, 
the  school  at  Paris  was  thronged  with  aspirants  for 
ecclesiastical  and  political  prizes.  Its  instruction  drew 
many  students,  since  it  seemed  to  offer  the  most  remu- 
nerative field  for  the  sale  of  technical  training.  It  is 
conceded  that  this  influx  of  place-seeking  candidates  for 
theological  degrees  had  an  injurious  effect  upon  the 
theological  faculty  at  Paris.  Its  subjects  were  not  being 
studied  or  taught  for  their  own  sake,  but  as  a  means  to 
ecclesiastical  preferment.  Moreover,  tempting  vacancies 
occurred  so  frequently,  that  half-trained  men  were 
constantly  leaving  the  university  to  accept  positions  of 
power.  The  discipline  of  the  school  naturally  suffered 
in  consequence.  The  university  came  thus  to  share  in  the 
demoralization  which  was  everywhere  apparent  during 
the  so-called  Babylonish  Captivity. 

But  a  decided  improvement  in  its  tone  took  place  when 
the  French  control  of  the  papacy  ceased.  The  Great 
Schism,  which  followed  the  popes'  return  from  Avignon, 
resulted  in  a  still  further  loss  of  papal  prestige,  but  for- 
tunately ended  the  French  monopoly  of  papal  favors.  It, 
however,  opened  indirectly  the  way  to  a  nobler  prominence 
of  the  French  people  in  the  affairs  of  the  Church.  Her 
policies  were  now  to  be  largely  dominated  by  the  Univer- 
sity of  Paris.  With  rival  popes  anathematizing  each  other, 
and  with  the  nations  of  Europe  aligned  in  partisan  interest 
behind  them,  there  was  sore  need  of  a  wise  adviser  and  a 
disinterested  umpire.  The  University  of  Paris  assumed 
this  difficult  role  and  played  it  with  ability,  if  not  always 
with  success.  In  the  failure  of  papal  authority  it  invoked 
the  long-neglected  authority  of  a  General  Council.  And 
not  only  did  the  university  induce  the  distracted  Church 
to  adopt  this  means  for  her  relief,  but  through  its  great 


Early  Manhood  65 

representatives  in  the  Reforming  Councils,  d'Ailly  and 
Gerson  and  others,  it  dominated  their  policies.  So 
theological  science,  as  represented  by  the  university, 
came  to  a  place  of  unprecedented  influence  in  the  Church 
and  in  the  State.  For  a  time,  it  spoke  with  an  authority 
greater  than  that  of  any  prince,  indeed,  greater  than  that 
of  the  pope ;  for  the  anomalous  spectacle  of  two,  and  even 
three,  successors  to  Saint  Peter  disconcerted  the  boldest 
advocates  of  papal  supremacy. 

It  was  soon  after  the  theologians  at  Paris  had  rendered 
this  large  service  to  the  Church,  that  there  revived  among 
them  the  old  contention  between  ReaHsm  and  Nominalism. 
As  it  was  interest  in  this  contention  that  at  the  first  drew 
Wessel  to  Paris,  the  subject  requires  more  than  passing 
notice.     Scholasticism  or  the  theological  system  of  the 
later  Middle  Ages  has  been  defined  as  an  application  of 
reason  to  theology,  not  in  order  to  revise  the  creed  or 
explore  for  new  truth,  but  to  systematize  and  prove  the 
existing  traditional  beliefs.     Its  great  maxim  was  the 
dictum   of   Augustine   that,    "Faith   seeks   knowledge," 
religious  belief  endeavors  to  justify  itself  to  the  intellect. 
The  Schoolmen  sought  in  the  two  greatest  sages  of  an- 
tiquity materials  from  which  they  could  construct  logical 
buttresses  for   the   traditional   dogmas   of   the   Church. 
Aristotle  was  their  chief  dependence,  both  as  to  matter 
and  method,  and  he  came  to  occupy  a  place  of  authority 
as  great  as  that  of  the  most  prominent  apostle.     In  this 
respect  his  position  resembled  that  held  by  Philo  in  the 
Alexandrian  theology.     His  system  was  studied  at  first 
in  the  translations  of  Boethius,  later  in  versions  of  his 
Arabic  interpreters,  and  finally,  as  in  the  case  of  Wessel, 
in  the  original  Greek.    But  with  the  Schoolman,  Plato 
was  always  something  of  a  rival  to  Aristotle.     His  in- 
fluence was  exerted  indirectly  at  first  through  Augustine 
and   the   Pseudo-Dionysius,   but  later,  with  the  coming 


66  Wessel  Gansfort 

of  the  New  Learning,  his  writings  were  read  in  the 
original. 

The  fundamental  question  at  issue  between  the  Realists 
and  the  Nominalists  was  this :  Have  our  so-called  univer- 
sals  objective  reality,  or  are  they  simply  convenient  forms 
of  thought  with  no  existence  outside  our  minds?  A 
representative  Realist  such  as  Albertus  Magnus  would 
affirm  that  universals  exist  in  a  threefold  sense:  ''ante 
rem''  in  the  mind  of  God  as  Plato  had  taught,  ''in  re"  in 
the  individual  of  the  species  according  to  the  Aristotelian 
doctrine,  and  "post  rem"  as  a  subjective  concept  in  the 
mind  of  man.  The  Nominalists  affirmed  that  the  only 
existence  that  the  universal  possesses  is  the  last  mentioned. 
It  was  a  product  of  the  mind,  an  abstraction,  a  verbal 
sign,  a  mental  convenience.  Between  these  two  extreme 
positions  there  were  many  mediating  ones,  such  as  the 
Formalism  of  Duns  Scotus  and  the  Conceptualism  of 
Abelard.  The  contention  took  a  new  phase  with  each 
new  creative  thinker.  It  was  a  problem  that  challenged 
every  adventurous  mind. 

It  was  more  than  an  academic  contention,  it  had  impor- 
tant practical  bearing  in  the  realm  of  dogmatics ;  just  as 
the  evolutionary  hypothesis,  which  relates  primarily  to 
biology,  has  profoundly  affected  the  theological  thinking 
of  our  generation.  The  doctrines  most  involved  in  the 
scholastic  controversy  were  those  relating  to  Anthropology 
and  to  the  Nature  of  God.  If  the  Realists  were  right  and 
the  thing  that  we  call  "Man"  has  distinct  existence  apart 
from  men,  then  we  can  reason  about  the  effect  of  Man's 
Fall  in  Eden,  and  frame  a  doctrine  of  original  sin,  and  the 
conditions  of  its  remedy.  But  if  the  term  refers  only  to  a 
mental  concept  and  not  to  an  objective  reality,  then  the 
doctrine  of  original  sin  hinted  by  Paul  and  elaborated  by 
Augustine  loses  its  philosophical  support.  And  so  with 
the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.     The  Realists  affirmed  that 


Early  Manhood  67 

the  basal,  the  generic  idea  was  that  of  Deity,  in  which  the 
three  persons  participate  as  concrete  expressions,  in- 
dividuahzations  of  Deity.  The  Nominahsts  declared 
that  this  destroyed  the  distinct  personality  of  Father  and 
Son  and  Spirit,  and  was  no  better  than  Sabellianism. 
But  the  Realists  replied  that  if  there  was  no  reality  cor- 
responding to  the  term,  Deity,  then  the  divine  persons 
had  no  adequate  ground  of  unity,  and  the  result  was 
practical  Tritheism,  A  like  antinomy  arose  in  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Divine  Attributes.  When,  for  example,  the 
Realist  affirmed  the  objective  existence  of  divine  justice, 
the  Nominalist  replied  that  that  was  to  separate  God  from 
his  own  attributes.  But  to  the  Nominalist  contention 
that  one  should  speak,  not  of  the  justice  of  God  but  only 
of  a  just  God  and  a  wise  God,  and  so  forth,  the  Realist 
objected  that  that  was  to  imply  as  many  Gods  as  there 
were  divine  qualities,  which  was  nothing  less  than  Poly- 
theism. 

It  was  these  dogmatic  consequences  of  the  contention 
that  kept  it  alive  from  generation  to  generation,  and  caused 
it  to  engross,  for  a  time  at  least,  so  earnest  and  practical 
a  man  as  Wessel.  And  there  was  one  other  element 
in  the  conflict  which  needs  to  be  noticed.  In  a  sense. 
Realism  had  come  to  be  recognized  as  philosophic  ortho- 
doxy. Nominalism  had  been  under  the  ban.  But  in 
Occam  in  the  fourteenth  century  it  had  found  an  able  and 
fearless  champion,  and  had  won  many  adherents,  among 
them  such  distinguished  members  of  the  theological  faculty 
at  Paris  as  d'Ailly  and  Gerson.  As  representing  dissent 
against  current  opinion  and  usage.  Nominalism  became 
to  some  degree  identified  with  the  cause  of  intellectual 
liberty  and  with  progress  and  reform  in  the  Church. 
In  some  notable  cases  it  formed  affiliation  with  Mysticism, 
and  to  its  own  critical  tendencies  added  insistence  on  a 
deeper    spiritual    life    for    the    individual.     Nominalism 


68  Wessel  Gansfort 

thus  served  as  a  bond  of  intellectual  interest  to  those  who 
in  the  fifteenth  century  and  the  next  were  impatient  with 
current  dogmatism  and  eager  for  reform  in  the  administra- 
tion of  the  Church.  Hence,  it  was  not  strange  that 
it  fell  under  official  condemnation.  In  France  the  civil 
authority  had  repeatedly  attempted  its  suppression. 
The  last  of  these  attempts,  as  already  noticed,  was  made 
by  Louis  XI  in  1473.  Wessel  was  then  living  in  Paris 
and  is  reported  to  have  been  prominently  concerned  in  the 
matter.  Louis  was  hardly  suited  to  the  rdle  of  champion 
of  orthodoxy,  though  as  morally  fit  as  many  another. 
History  has  recorded  little  in  his  praise,  and  he  is  said  to 
have  served  Machiavelli  as  a  model  for  his  literary  portrait 
of  The  Prince.  But  Louis  had  seen  the  political  advantage 
of  securing  papal  aid  to  the  French  monarchy,  and  had 
signalized  his  devotion  to  the  papacy  by  repealing  in 
1461  that  charter  of  Galilean  Liberties,  the  Pragmatic 
Sanction.  It  was  due  doubtless  to  the  pope's  influence 
that  he  undertook  to  suppress  the  spirit  of  dissent  and 
criticism  in  the  foremost  school  in  his  realm.  He  took 
pride  in  the  new  title  of  "Most  Christian  King  and  De- 
fender of  the  Catholic  Faith,"  and  it  was  in  this  character 
that  he  issued  an  edict  addressed  to  the  University  of 
Paris  in  which  he  enjoins  the  faculties  of  Arts  and  Theology 
to  teach  and  defend  the  "safe  and  sound  doctrine  of  the 
Realists,"  and  forbids  the  public  or  private  teaching  of 
Nominalism  or  kindred  doctrines  anywhere  in  the  realm. 
All  teachers  were  required  to  take  an  oath  before  the 
Rector  that  they  would  obey  the  edict.  Banishment  or 
excommunication  might  follow  refusal.  Nominalist  writ- 
ings must  be  delivered  up  to  an  appointed  officer  for  safe 
keeping.  This  obscurantist  policy  of  the  King  had  an 
effect  quite  the  opposite  of  that  intended.  It  awakened 
popular  interest  in  the  proscribed  doctrines.  The  uni- 
versity authorities  also  began  to  devise  ways  of  evading 


Early  Manhood  69 

the  requirements  of  the  edict,  and  were  so  successful  that 
its  terms  were  soon  relaxed  and  ultimately  the  edict 
itself  was  repealed. 

An  understanding  of  this  contest  at  Paris  is  important 
in  explaining  the  change  of  party  which  Wessel  underwent 
soon  after  his  coming  to  Paris.  Realism  had  been  the 
accepted  system  at  Cologne.  Wessel  had  espoused  it 
with  such  ardor  that  he  wished  to  become  its  champion 
at  Paris,  where  he  heard  that  it  was  being  assailed.  But 
apparently  until  he  came  to  Paris,  he  had  studied  only 
under  Realist  teachers  and  he  had  not  heard  what  could 
be  said  on  the  other  side.  He  had  the  cheerful  confidence 
of  those  who  have  never  discovered  how  strong  a  case 
can  be  made  by  their  opponents.  He  himself  informs  us 
that  he  came  to  Paris  with  the  expectation  of  converting 
two  of  his  fellow-countrymen,  who  were  teachers  there, 
from  the  errors  of  Nominalism.  But  evidently  he  saw 
things  in  a  new  light  after  his  arrival.  There  was  more  to 
be  Said  in  opposition  to  Realism  than  he  had  ever  imagined. 
Moreover,  he  must  have  soon  discovered  that  by  natural 
bent  and  disposition  of  mind  he  belonged  with  the  Nomin- 
alists, who  as  has  been  said  stood  for  intellectual  freedom 
and  criticism  and  reform.  It  is  immensely  to  Wessel' s 
credit  as  a  scholar  and  a  man  that  he  so  readily  acknowl- 
edged his  error  and  defeat,  and  abandoned  the  cause 
which  he  had  expected  to  champion.  One  naturally 
recalls  in  this  connection  the  experience  of  his  more 
distinguished  fellow-countryman,  Arminius,  whose  ma- 
turer  thought  led  him  to  attack  the  Calvinistic  System, 
which  as  Professor  of  Theology  at  Leyden  he  was  expected 
to  defend. 

Wessel  thus  records  his  change  of  opinion:  "But 
after  meeting  men  stronger  than  myself,  I  perceived  my 
own  weakness,  and  before  three  months  had  passed,  I 
yielded  my  opinion,  and  forthwith  with  all  zeal  searched 


70  Wessel  Gansfort 

the  books  of  Scotus,  Maro,  and  Bonetus, — writers  who 
I  had  learned  were  the  leaders  in  that  school.  Not  content 
with  that,  before  I  had  spent  a  year  in  studying  as  dili- 
gently and  thoughtfully  as  I  could  the  doctrines  of  Scotus 
with  which  I  began,  I  discovered  graver  errors  in  those 
than  in  the  teachings  of  the  Realists,  and  being  ready  to 
be  corrected,  I  again  changed  my  opinion  and  joined  the 
Nominalists.  And  I  frankly  confess,  that  if  I  thought  the 
latter  held  any  views  contrary  to  the  faith,  I  am  prepared 
to-day  to  return  to  either  the  Formalists  or  the  ReaHsts." 
That  this  radical  change  of  front  does  not  indicate  any 
fickleness  of  opinion  or  instability  of  mind  on  Wessel's 
part  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  to  the  end  of  his  days  he 
remained  a  consistent  and  loyal  Nominalist.  As  Harden- 
berg  has  expressed  it:  "As  he  did  not  find  a  safer  path,  or 
one  which  more  nearly  approached  the  simplicity  of 
Scripture  and  of  the  ancient  Fathers,  he  adhered  to  the 
sect  of  the  Nominalists,  bringing  all  that  was  excellent  in 
the  doctrine  of  the  Schools  to  the  highest  perfection." 

It  is  difficult,  with  our  limited  data,  to  understand 
just  what  was  Wessel's  relation  to  the  University  of  Paris 
during  the  fifteen  and  more  years  that  he  spent  there. 
As  he  had  attained  to  the  degree  of  Master  of  Arts  at 
Cologne,  he  was  entitled  to  admission  in  that  Faculty 
at  Paris,  but  there  is  little  to  indicate  that  he  held  a  regu- 
lar professorship.  We  might  naturally  expect  that  he 
would  qualify  for  the  Doctor's  degree,  yet  he  does  not 
seem  to  have  been  concerned  for  that  distinction,  though 
later  his  lack  of  it  proved  a  serious  disadvantage  to  him. 
It  is  evident  that  while  he  was  in  Paris  Wessel  was  both 
student  and  teacher.  This  alternation  in  academic 
relations  was  not  an  uncommon  thing  in  the  medieval 
universities.  Before  printing  came  into  general  use, 
there  was  no  way  to  get  the  views  of  a  fellow  professor 
except  to  enter  his  class-room,  or  get  access  to  his  manu- 


Early  Manhood  71 

scripts.  Hence  professors  in  one  institution  or  faculty- 
were  often  students  in  another.  There  is  something 
comparable  to  this  still,  for  one  frequently  sees  in  German 
university  lecture-rooms  mature  men  who  are  holding 
chairs  of  instruction  in  other  institutions. 

There  are  those  who  have  attributed  to  Wessel  official 
prominence  in  the  University.  De  Thou  in  his  History 
of  France  speaks  of  him  as  "the  restorer  of  the  University," 
and  Mezeray  informs  us  that  he  was  at  one  time  Rector. 
But  it  is  impossible  to  authenticate  these  statements. 
It  seems  more  probable  that  Wessel's  position  in  the 
University,  besides  being  that  of  a  student  in  Philosophy 
and  Theology,  was  that  of  licensed  teacher,  "privat- 
docent"  we  might  say.  There  were  many  scholars  in 
those  days  who  spent  their  whole  lives  in  the  universities, 
without  holding  or  seeking  to  hold  any  regular  professor- 
ship. They  preferred  the  freedom  of  a  student,  teaching 
privately,  perhaps  lecturing  to  voluntary  classes,  but  not 
obligating  themselves  to  meet  regular  professorial  appoint- 
ments. This  would  seem  to  have  been  the  case  with 
Wessel,  and  it  would  appear  that  this  loose  relation  to  the 
University  did  not  prevent  him  from  becoming  an  influen- 
tial man  in  the  academic  community.  This  was  due 
partly  no  doubt  to  the  large  place  that  public  disputa- 
tions or  debates  had  in  the  medieval  university  and 
Wessel's  fondness  and  marked  aptitude  for  these  forensic 
encounters.  He  apparently  won  his  way  to  recognition 
by  these  public  discussions  and  the  conferences  of  the 
class-room,  and  no  less  by  his  own  acknowledged  ability 
as  a  teacher  and  the  promoter  of  the  studies  of  others. 
He  made  his  impression  at  Paris  by  the  direct  impact  of 
his  personality  upon  his  associates,  for  his  books  are  the 
product  of  his  later  years. 

There  is  a  persistent  legend  to  the  effect  that  Wessel 
was  famed  for  his  skill  as  a  physician.     Ubbo  Emmius, 


72  Wessel  Gansfort 

head  of  the  college  in  Groningen  in  the  sixteenth  century, 
asserts  positively  that  Wessel  was  not  only  the  intimate 
friend  but  the  medical  attendant  of  Pope  Sixtus  IV. 
There  appears  to  be  no  reason  for  doubting  that  he  had 
acquired  a  knowledge  of  medicine,  but  whether  at  Cologne 
or  at  Paris  cannot  be  ascertained.  If  he  practiced  medi- 
cine, even  in  the  desultory  way  so  common  at  the  time, 
that  might  afford  us  a  solution  to  the  problem  as  to  how 
he  maintained  himself  during  his  long  studies  and  exten- 
sive travels.  But  even  in  that  case,  his  interest  in  medi- 
cine was  wholly  subordinate  to  his  philosophical  and 
theological  studies.  It  is  highly  improbable  that  he 
came  to  eminence  in  the  science  of  medicine.  And  as  for 
his  reputation  for  great  skill  in  medical  practice,  that 
ma3^  have  been  due  simply  to  the  exaggeration  of  his 
friends,  since  the  physician's  art  has  always  lent  itself  to 
popular  superstition. 

Our  surest  clue  to  Wessel's  occupation  during  the  years 
he  spent  in  Paris  is  to  be  found  in  the  brief  notices  of  the 
masters  under  whom  he  studied,  the  intimate  friends 
he  made,  the  future  scholars  whom  he  influenced.  Un- 
fortunately, we  know  comparatively  little  of  his  Parisian 
teachers.  That  some  of  them  influenced  him  deeply  we 
have  his  own  assurance.  That  he  valued  the  instruction 
that  he  received  there,  and  prized  the  library  privileges, 
and  enjoyed  the  academic  atmosphere  must  be  assumed 
to  explain  his  long  residence  at  the  University  of  Paris. 
Wessel  was  not  among  those  who  involve  biographical 
data  in  their  ordinary  writings;  nor  have  many  of  his 
letters  been  preserved;  so  that  our  knowledge  of  his 
teachers  at  Paris,  as  well  as  many  other  matters,  depends 
upon  casual  references  to  them,  and  brief  statements 
by  his  earliest  biographers. 

The  professors  at  Paris  whom  he  mentions  as  among  his 
teachers  were  all  members  of  his  own  Nation  of  Picardy, 


Early  Manhood  73 

and  they  were  evidently  his  personal  friends.  Two  of 
them,  Henry  of  Zomeren  and  Nicolaus  of  Utrecht,  were, 
as  has  already  been  noticed,  instrumental  during  his  first 
year  at  Paris  in  changing  him  from  a  Realist  to  a  Nominal- 
ist. Of  the  latter  we  know  nothing.  The  former  was 
from  Brabant,  was  dean  of  the  cathedral  at  Antwerp,  and 
was  a  friend  of  Cardinal  Bessarion.  In  1460  he  left  Paris 
to  become  professor  in  the  University  of  Louvain.  Here 
he  became  involved  in  a  series  of  controversies  with  a 
professor  in  the  theological  department  over  the  question 
of  future  contingencies.  It  is  indicative  of  the  interest 
then  taken  in  matters  metaphysical  that  the  dispute 
should  have  been  brought  to  the  attention  of  Pope  Sixtus 
IV,  Wessel's  friend,  .who  decided  it  in  Henry's  favor.  The 
Pope  felt  the  more  confident  to  pronounce  in  such  a  recon- 
dite matter  from  having  himself  written  a  book  on  the 
subject.  Of  the  three  other  teachers  mentioned  we  know 
practically  nothing.  They  are  William  of  Phalis,  John  of 
Brussels,  and  John  of  Picardy.  The  last  mentioned  had 
been  Rector  of  the  University  before  Wessel's  coming. 
He  was  evidently  a  man  of  unusual  distinction,  for  he  had 
been  for  many  years  at  the  head  of  the  Faculty  of  Arts. 

The  standing  that  Wessel  acquired  in  the  academic 
community  at  Paris  may  be  inferred  from  the  prominence  ,^ 
of  two  of  his  intimate  friends.     One  was  Cardinal  Bes-    '■■ 
sarion,  a  highly  cultivated  Greek,  who  is  described  as  J 
"the  Maecenas  of  all  exiled  Greeks."     He  had  studied  at 
Constantinople,  and  had  been  archbishop  of  Nicea.     He 
was  prominent  among  the  representatives  of  the  Greek 
communion  who  at  Ferrara  and  Florence  had  labored  for 
the  union  of  the  Roman  and  Greek  Churches,    After  being 
honored  by  the  pope  with  the  gift  of  the  red  hat  he  re- 
mained in  the  west.     His  house  in  Rome  was  an  asylum 
for  Greek  exiles,  and  a  center  of  classical  studies.     In 
1455  he  was  a  prominent  candidate  for  the  papal  throne, 


74  Wessel  Gansfort 

and  was  later  entrusted  with  many  important  diplomatic 
missions.  It  was  such  a  mission,  that  of  mediator  be- 
tween the  duke  of  Burgundy  and  the  French  king,  that  kept 
him  at  Paris  at  the  time  that  he  formed  his  friendship 
with  Wessel.  To  Bessarion  has  been  attributed  one  of 
the  names  by  which  Wessel  is  known.  It  is  related  that 
this  cultivated  Greek  found  the  word,  Wessel,  difficult 
of  pronunciation,  and  in  their  friendly  intercourse  changed 
it  to  Basil,  its  near  equivalent  in  Greek,  and  the  name  of 
the  founder  of  the  monastic  order  to  which  the  Cardinal 
belonged.  There  was  an  implied  compliment  in  this 
nickname,  as  Basil  was  one  of  the  great  scholars  of  the 
patristic  age. 

An  even  more  distinguished  friend  of  Wessel  in  his 
Parisian  days  was  an  Italian  named  Francis  de  Rovere. 
He  was  not  so  eminent  as  a  scholar  as  was  Bessarion,  but 
honors  fell  thicker  upon  him.  Born  of  humble  parents, 
a  few  years  before  Wessel,  he  early  entered  the  Franciscan 
brotherhood  and  devoted  himself  to  study.  He  became  a 
trusted  representative  of  that  order  as  teacher  of  theology 
in  several  Italian  universities.  When  he  was  fifty  years 
of  age  he  was  made  General  of  his  order;  three  years 
later,  through  the  influence  of  Bessarion,  he  was  raised 
to  the  rank  of  Cardinal  and  four  years  thereafter  became 
Pope  Sixtus  IV. 

While  Wessel  and  Francis  may  have  had  common  schol- 
arly interests,  they  were  men  of  strongly  contrasting 
types,  and  their  friendship  illustrates  the  attraction  of 
opposite  poles  of  temperament.  Francis  was  a  friar,  a 
man  of  the  world,  a  patron  of  humanistic  studies,  and  not 
above  the  common  faults  of  his  age  and  class.  Wessel 
was  a  pious  scholar,  with  a  strong  critical  and  reformatory 
bent.  Yet  these  men  were  intimate  friends  at  Paris,  and 
as  we  shall  see  were  associated  in  Rome.  Francis  fre- 
quently sought  to  lead  Wessel  to  join  his  order,   as  a 


Early  Manhood  75 

means,  doubtless,  to  his  preferment.  But  Wessel  showed 
no  more  disposition  to  join  the  friars  than  he  had  in  early 
life  to  become  a  monk.  He  was  developing  a  strong 
aversion  to  the  ascetic  life,  and  while  it  did  not  interfere 
with  his  friendship  for  Francis,  it  did  eventually  bring 
him  into  collision  with  the  monks. 

The  esteem  in  which  Wessel  was  held  in  the  generation 
after  his  death  must  be  attributed  to  his  personal  influence 
upon  his  students  and  associates  at  Paris  and  elsewhere. 
His  writings,  which  belong  to  the  latter  years  of  his  life, 
do  not  seem  to  have  been  widely  read,  until  after  printing 
came  into  vogue.  That  he  should  have  been  called  "Lux 
Mundi"  by  his  admiring  disciples  is  in  itself  indicative  of 
his  superlative  success  as  a  teacher,  yet  we  have  the 
names  of  comparatively  few  men  of  prominence  who 
were  among  his  students  while  he  was  in  Paris.  Two  of 
these,  who  became  famous  Humanists,  merit  special  notice. 
They  are  Rudolph  Agricola  and  John  Reuchlin.  The  for^ 
mer,  who  was  more  than  twenty  years  Wessel's  junior, 
was  a  fellow-countryman,  having  been  born  a  few  miles 
from  Groningen.  It  is  supposed  that  they  had  been 
acquainted  in  their  native  land.  Agricola  was  in  Paris 
several  years  during  Wessel's  residence  there,  and  a 
warm  friendship  grew  up  between  them.  They  had  the 
common  bond  of  race  and  region,  and  an  interest  also  in 
the  classics.  Agricola  has  left  the  statement  that  while 
Wessel  was  not  in  a  strict  sense  his  teacher,  yet  he  was  a 
friendly  promoter  of  his  studies  and  induced  him  to  under- 
take the  mastery  of  Hebrew.  He  also  bears  testimony 
to  the  wholesome  religious  effect  of  Wessel's  influence  over 
him.  Agricola  was  to  become  a  lecturer  on  the  classics 
at  Worms  and  Heidelberg,  and  a  writer  of  note. 

Of  Wessel's  relation  to  the  more  famous  Reuchlin  we 
have  less  specific  and  first-hand  information.  He  came 
to  Paris  with  the  margrave  of  Baden  in  1473,  after  Wessel 


76  Wessel  Gansfort 

had  returned  from  Italy.  He  was  then  an  eager  youth  of 
eighteen,  and  he  sought  instruction  of  the  now  famous 
scholar.  From  him  he  is  said  to  have  received  "his  in- 
troduction to  philosophy  and  the  ancient  languages,  and 
guidance  to  the  original  and  genuine  fountains  of  the 
Aristotelian  doctrines."  Melanchthon  was  of  the  opinion 
that  he  also  taught  him  Hebrew,  in  whose  popularization 
among  scholars  he  was  to  meet  violent  opposition  and  also 
win  his  greatest  distinction.  Reuchlin's  own  statement 
seems  to  deny  that  Wessel  had  taught  him  Hebrew, 
but  it  is  probable  that,  as  in  the  case  of  Agricola,  he 
induced  him  to  take  up  that  study. 

There  is  another  side  to  Wessel 's  residence  in  Paris 
that  deserves  notice  here.  He  had  prominent  friends  and 
admiring  students,  but  he  also  had  adversaries.  That 
was  to  be  expected  of  one  so  independent  of  mind  and  so 
forcible  in  speech.  He  courted  controversy,  championed 
new  ideas,  attacked  old  usages  in  the  Church,  and  advo- 
cated reforms  in  the  life  of  the  University.  Naturally 
he  made  bitter  enemies.  If  his  disciples  called  him 
"Lux  Mundi, "  there  were  others  who  believed  that 
"Magister  Contradictionum "  was  a  more  appropriate 
title.  Unquestionably,  there  arose  in  certain  quarters 
violent  opposition  to  him.  There  was  a  legend  current 
in  Hardenberg's  time  that  Wessel  was  driven  out  of  Paris 
by  his  opponents,  but  if  there  is  any  basis  to  this  story, 
it  must  have  reference  to  his  later  visit  to  Paris,  for  at  the 
conclusion  of  his  first  residence  there  he  went  to  Rome  in 
the  suite  of  the  future  pope.  In  his  youth,  as  we  have 
seen,  Wessel  had  a  rather  narrow  escape  from  the  monastic 
life,  urged  upon  him  as  it  was  by  Thomas  a  Kempis. 
Later  in  life  he  strongly  reacted  from  it,  and  with  good 
reason,  for  in  the  fifteenth  century  monasticism  was  in  a 
state  of  moral  decline,  and  was  engaged  in  vain  attempts 
to  reform  itself.     Nevertheless,  monasticism  was  still  a 


wl' 


:*s 


i 


The  Entrance  to  the  Convent  of  the  Spiritual  Virgins  in  Groningen 


Early  Manhood  77 

very  influential  institution.  The  Church  and  the  uni- 
versities were  largely  under  the  control  of  the  various 
monkish  orders.  In  criticizing  monasticism  Wessel  made 
powerful  enemies;  and  at  Paris  the  monks  evidently 
began  to  manifest  toward  him  that  enmity  which  later 
was  to  endanger  his  life  and  finally  resulted  in  the  destruc- 
tion of  many  of  his  writings. 

If  Wessel  was  as  outspoken  in  other  matters  in  which 
he  differed  from  current  opinion  as  he  was  on  the  subject 
of  indulgences  we  can  readily  imagine  the  storm  that  he 
would  precipitate.  In  a  letter  to  Jacob  Hoeck  he  writes : 
"Not  only  now  but  thirty-three  years  ago,  because  I  was 
irresistibly  carried  away  with  zeal  for  the  truth,  I  re- 
peatedly maintained  before  all  the  learned  men  at  Paris 
that  from  boyhood  it  had  always  seemed  to  me  absurd 
and  unworthy  that  any  man  (meaning  the  pope)  by  his 
own  verdict  can  increase  the  value  of  a  good  work  in  the 
sight  of  God — doubling  its  worth,  for  example,  simply 
through  the  accession  or  intervention  of  a  human  decree." 

There  is  reason  to  believe  that  Wessel  had  some  impor- 
tant part  in  certain  reforms  that  were  instituted  in  the 
University.  Certainly  the  moral  conditions  in  Paris, 
and  in  the  other  large  student  bodies  of  the  Middle  Ages, 
were  such  as  to  excite  the  rebuke  of  a  man  of  Wessel's 
earnest  piety.  The  contrast  there  presented  to  the 
simple  devout  life  of  the  students  at  ZwoUe  was  too  strik- 
ing not  to  call  forth  his  criticism.  We  have  his  opinion 
concerning  conditions  in  Paris  and  Cologne.  He  laments 
the  lack  of  Christian  morals  and  religious  interest.  After 
speaking  of  the  cold  reception  that  Paul's  gospel  found  in 
Athens,  he  says:  "The  study  of  the  sacred  sciences,  when 
it  is  merely  superficial  and  not  animated  by  a  higher 
spirit,  is  not  in  itself  particularly  acceptable  to  God.  In 
fact,  what  I  saw  when  living  in  Cologne  and  Paris  was 
doubtless  rather  odious  to  Him,  I  mean,  not  the  study 


78  Wessel  Gansfort 

of  the  sacred  sciences,  but  the  moral  depravity  with  which 
it  was  mixed  up."  In  the  same  connection  he  appHes 
our  Lord's  condemnation  of  the  scribes  to  those  in  the 
universities  who  were  engaged  in  sacred  studies  for  which 
they  had  no  real  love.  But  it  would  seem  that  Wessel 
did  more  than  criticize  the  abuses  in  the  life  of  the  Univer- 
sity. He  assisted  in  ways  that  have  not  been  recorded 
in  bringing  about  their  amendment.  The  statement  of 
De  Thou  that  he  was  "one  of  the  restorers  of  the  uni- 
versity," and  the  association  of  his  name  with  those  of 
William  of  Paris  and  Gerson,  in  a  sixteenth-century  letter 
to  Henry  II,  as  men  of  the  highest  learning  who  had 
sought  to  amend  the  errors  and  abuses  of  the  times,  are 
intimations  of  Wessel 's  reformatory  influence  in  the 
Univarsity  of  Paris. 

There  is  an  utterance  of  Wessel  which  belongs  to  his 
Paris  days  and  is  characteristic  of  his  independence  of 
mind  and  reluctance  to  submit  to  any  human  authority, 
even  though  it  be  that  of  the  great  Master,  Thomas 
Aquinas.  When  he  was  urged  to  let  his  dictum  settle  a 
matter  under  dispute  he  replied:  "Thomas  was  a 
Doctor,  what  then?  I  am  a  Doctor,  too.  Thomas 
hardly  knew  Latin,  and  it  was  the  only  language  he  did 
know :  whereas  I  am  master  of  the  three  principal  tongues. 
Thomas  scarcely  beheld  Aristotle's  shadow,  but  I  have  seen 
him  in  Greek,  and  among  the  Greeks."  j 


CHAPTER  V 

HIS  LATER  MANHOOD 

It  is  impossible  to  ascertain  exactly  when  Wessel  left 
Paris.  But  it  could  not  have  been  later  than  1470,  for 
in  one  of  his  letters  he  speaks  of  being  in  Rome  during 
"the  penultimate  year  of  Paul  II, "who  died  in  1471. 
Thus  his  first  residence  in  France  had  lasted  about  sixteen 
years.  Part  of  this  long  period  he  had  spent  in  travel, 
visiting  many  of  the  cities  and  schools  of  France.  Among 
these  he  especially  mentions  Angers  and  Lyons.  One 
incident  in  his  visit  at  the  latter  city  he  recalled  many 
years  afterward.  It  is  trivial  in  itself,  but  that  it  should 
have  made  so  lasting  an  impression  upon  his  mind  is 
indicative  of  the  wholesome  simplicity  of  his  nature. 
While  he  was  in  Lyons  there  occurred  the  death  of  a  man 
whose  dog  was  so  devoted  to  him  that  he  refused  all  food, 
and  lay  upon  his  master's  grave  till  he  perished  of  grief  and 
starvation.  Wessel  often  alluded  to  this  incident,  con- 
trasting the  perfect  devotion  of  this  dog  to  his  human 
master  with  our  imperfect  devotion  to  our  divine  Master. 

The  occasion  of  Wessel's  going  to  Rome  is  nowhere 
definitely  stated.  Several  of  his  Parisian  friends  and 
teachers  were  there,  and  it  seems  probable  that  he  went 
thither  in  company  with  his  friend  Cardinal  Rovere,  who 
was  soon  to  become  Sixtus  IV.  It  has  been  the  complaint 
of  many  popes  that  everyone  that  came  to  Rome  had  an 
axe  to  grind,  but  Wessel  was  not  among  the  seekers  of 

79 


8o  Wessel  Gansfort 

office  or  other  favors,  who  thronged  the  approaches  to  the 
Papal  Court.  He  could  have  indulged  no  hope  of  ecclesi- 
astical preferment,  for  he  was  neither  a  priest  nor  a  monk, 
and  had  no  intention  of  becoming  either. 

He  evidently  went  to  Rome  as  he  had  gone  to  Paris, 
as  a  student  of  philosophy  and  theology.  That  Italy 
was  the  seat  of  the  most  advanced  humanistic  studies 
must  have  had  its  influence,  though  to  him  classical 
learning  was  always  subsidiary  to  philosophy  and  to  his 
desire  to  come  face  to  face  with  the  Greek  sages  and  the 
authors  of  the  New  Testament.  At  this  time  the  Italian 
schools  were  attracting  many  scholars  from  the  north.  As 
the  ambitious  student  of  theology  felt  that  his  training  was 
incomplete  without  a  period  of  study  at  Paris,  so  the  student 
of  the  classics  or  of  canon  law  believed  that  he  must  cross 
the  Alps  and  visit  the  seats  of  the  ancient  Roman  civiliza- 
tion and  hear  some  of  the  famous  Italian  savants.  Many 
of  these  students  naturally  gravitated  to  Rome,  not  only 
because  of  its  archeological  interest,  but  because  academic 
as  well  as  ecclesiastical  positions  were  there  to  be  obtained. 
While  the  greater  part  of  Wessel 's  Italian  sojourn  was 
spent  at  Rome,  yet  his  humanistic  interest  led  him  to 
visit  the  schools  at  Venice  and  Florence.  At  the  latter 
city  the  Platonic  Academy  established  by  Cosimo  de 
Medici,  and  the  library  of  Greek  and  Latin  and  oriental 
manuscripts  begun  by  him,  were  attracting  men  of  note 
from  all  parts  of  Europe.  Marsilius  Ficinus  was  then  at 
the  head  of  the  school.  Wessel's  friend  Cardinal  Rovere 
had  studied  there,  and  later  Reuchlin  was  to  find  his  way 
thither.  And  later  still  the  brilliant  young  linguist  and 
philosopher,  Pico  della  Mirandola,  was  to  solace  his 
disappointment  and  end  his  unhappy  career  there. 

In  this  Academy,  as  in  the  ancient  theological  school  at 
Alexandria,  Plato  was  revered  as  an  inspired  sage  and 
prophet,  and  his  philosophy  and  that  of  his  Neo-Platonic 


Later  Manhood  8i 

successors  was  taught  as  the  true  basis  of  theology.  No 
doubt,  under  such  influences  Wessel's  preference  for 
Plato  as  against  Aristotle,  whose  philosophic  method 
formed  the  basis  of  current  Scholasticism,  received  strong 
reinforcement.  He  does  not,  however,  appear  to  have 
been  favorably  impressed  with  the  life  of  the  city,  brilliant 
as  it  was,  and  later  he  contrasts  it  unfavorably  with  the 
simpler  manners  of  his  fellow-countrymen  at  Zwolle. 

Concerning  Wessel's  visit  at  Venice  only  one  incident 
has  been  recorded.  While  he  was  there  a  papal  commis- 
sion was  engaged  in  conducting  the  investigations  into  the 
life  and  alleged  miracles  of  a  candidate  for  canonization. 
Of  these  transactions  Wessel  was  an  interested  witness. 
And  whatever  may  have  been  his  personal  opinion  as  to 
the  claims  that  the  Patriarch  of  Aquileia  had  to  be  num- 
bered with  the  saints,  he  did  not  hesitate,  later,  to  say 
that  such  a  process  as  was  required  by  canon  law  involved 
much  less  peril  to  the  Church  than  the  earlier  method  of 
canonization  in  response  to  local  and  popular  demand. 

It  may  be  noted  in  passing  that  Wessel,  wide  as  was  the 
range  of  his  interests  and  varied  as  was  his  learning,  was 
apparently  unimpressed  by  the  beauty  of  the  Italian 
scenery  or  the  monuments  of  Rome's  classic  splendor,  or 
by  the  dawning  art  of  the  Renaissance.  In  this  he  simply 
reveals  himself  as  the  child  of  the  Middle  Ages,  which 
took  little  delight  in  the  beauty  of  the  world,  and  apart 
from  architecture  showed  but  little  interest  in  the  fine 
arts.  Even  Erasmus,  exquisitely  sensitive  as  he  was  to 
the  charms  of  a  literary  masterpiece,  apparently  cared 
nothing  for  the  works  of  the  painter  or  the  sculptor; 
iand  passed  through  some  of  the  most  beautiful  regions  in 
Europe  without  making  any  mention  of  them  in  his  let- 
ters or  journals.  Luther,  also,  crossed  and  recrossed  the 
Alps  on  foot  on  his  memorable  journey  to  Rome,  but 
was  apparently  so  engrossed  in  his  own  thoughts  that  the 

VOL.  I — 6 


82  VVessel  Gansfort 

sublimity   of  the    Alpine    scenery    made   no   impression 
upon  him. 

If  Wessel's  visits  to  Florence  and  Venice  were  due  to 
his  humanistic  and  philosophic  interest,  his  much  longer 
stay  in  Rome  must  be  attributed  to  some  other  cause. 
Paul  II  had  suppressed  the  Roman  Academy,  and  not 
without  good  reason.  A  system  of  academies  had  sprung 
up  in  the  larger  Italian  cities  under  the  impulse  of  the 
New  Learning.  They  afforded  a  convenient  organization 
for  those  interested  in  humanistic  studies,  and  provided 
an  agency  for  the  propagation  of  their  views.  The 
Academy  at  Rome  was  unfortunate  in  the  character  of  its 
founder,  a  Calabrian  of  noble  parentage,  who  had  assumed 
the  old  Roman  name  of  Pomponius  Loetus.  His  interest 
was  wholly  archeological,  and  he  came  to  assume  an 
attitude  of  contempt  toward  religion  and  the  clergy, 
while  he  feigned  a  devotion  to  the  customs  and  worship  of 
antiquity.  He  possessed  genuine  talent  as  a  lecturer 
on  the  classics  and  on  the  monuments  of  ancient  Rome, 
and  by  this  means  won  a  large  following.  He  affords  a 
striking  example  of  the  tendency  among  the  Italian 
Humanists  to  break  away  from  the  Church  and  its  re- 
straints, and  revive  ancient  pagan  religious  ideas  and 
morals.  Under  his  influence  the  Roman  Academy  became 
the  center  of  a  group  of  young  men  who  were  interested 
in  humanistic  studies.  They  chose  new  names  from  classic 
antiquity,  as  the  northern  Humanists  of  a  later  period 
were  to  Latinize  or  Hellenize  their  names,  and  they 
sometimes  observed  pagan  festivals  and  even  parodied 
the  most  sacred  services  of  the  Church.  Finally,  as  the 
climax  of  their  folly,  they  hailed  Pomponius  as  Pontifex 
Maximus !  This,  occurring  almost  under  the  shadow  of  the 
Vatican,  was  more  than  papal  patience  could  well  endure. 
'I  I  The  pope  had  the  leaders  imprisoned  for  a  time,  dis- 
/  solved  the  Academy,  and  forbade  anyone  to  mention  the 


Later  Manhood  83 

matter  in  his  hearing.  This  happened  a  year  or  two  be- 
fore Wessel  arrived  in  Rome.  It  goes  without  saying 
'  that  he  would  have  had  Httle  sympathy  with  Humanists 
who  had  no  interest  in  philosophy  and  sneered  at  religion, 
j Doubtless  there  were  in  Rome  devotees  of  the  New 
/Learning  of  a  different  sort,  but  the  outrageous  conduct 
jof  those  connected  with  the  Academy  and  the  frown  of 
papal  disfavor  had  discredited  the  movement  for  the 
time. 

Paul  II,  who  was  pope  when  Wessel  came  to  Rome, 
was  more  interested  in  enlarging  his  collection  of  antique 
curios  and  works  of  art  and  in  erecting  noble  Renaissance 
buildings  than  he  was  in  giving  encouragement  to  the 
literary  men  who  haunted  the  Eternal  City  with  the 
hope  of  obtaining  papal  patronage.  He  frankly  declared 
that  he  disliked  their  society,  and  he  openly  rebuked 
their  loose  talk  and  careless  living.  In  his  private  life 
he  set  an  example  of  simplicity  and  industry  which  those 
about  him  in  the  Papal  Court  seemed  little  disposed  to 
follow.  He  had  done  what  he  could  to  maintain  the 
nobler  traditions  of  the  papacy,  but  the  dominant  influ- 
ences of  his  age  were  hostile  to  his  better  purposes.  Upon 
his  unexpected  death  in  Augu:t,  1471,  two  of  Wessel's 
intimate  friends  were  prominent  candidates  for  the  papal 
throne.  Bessarion  was  the  senior  cardinal  and  enjoyed 
unrivaled  distinction  as  a  scholar,  but  he  was  a  Greek 
and  was  politically  unacceptable  to  the  French.  So  the 
choice  fell  upon  Francis  de  Rovere,  a  younger  man,  of 
scholarly  attainments  and  tried  administrative  ability, 
who  chose  the  name  Sixtus  IV.  In  securing  his  election, 
however,  the  determining  factor  was  not  so  much  his 
evident  intellectual  qualification  for  the  high  office  as  the 
shrewd  manipulation  of  the  cardinals  by  his  ambitious 
nephew,  Giuliano. 

The  pontificate  of  Sixtus  began  in  a  way  to  dishearten 


84  Wessel  Gansfort 

those  who  hoped  for  improvement  in  the  administration 
of  the  Church.  He  first  undertook  to  discharge  his 
political  debts  and  appease  his  disappointed  competitors. 
He  handsomely  rewarded  the  cardinals  who  had  assisted 
in  his  election;  but  it  was  upon  his  nephews,  especially 
the  profligate  Giuliano,  that  he  lavished  honors  and 
benefices  that  should  have  rewarded  high  character  and 
faithful  service  to  the  Church.  So  Sixtus  began  a  pontifi- 
cate that  for  consistent  and  unblushing  nepotism  surpassed 
anything  that  Rome  had  ever  witnessed.  But  in  elevat- 
ing his  relatives  to  places  of  power  he  was  not  concerned 
chiefly  to  favor  those  of  his  own  blood,  but  rather  to 
surround  himself  with  those  on  whose  allegiance  and 
cooperation  he  could  depend.  On  the  young  nephew  who 
had  successfully  intrigued  for  his  election,  Sixtus  conferred 
the  cardinalate,  five  bishoprics,  and  the  patriarchate  of 
Constantinople.  Other  benefices  rapidly  followed,  until 
this  comparatively  obscure  youth  possessed  a  revenue 
like  that  of  a  king  and  dazzled  Rome  with  the  magnificence 
of  his  establishment  and  retinue.  Another  nephew,  a 
layman,  was  made  Prefect  of  Rome,  and  to  secure  him  an 
advantageous  marriage  with  a  Neapolitan  lady  of  rank, 
the  pope  sacrificed  the  papal  claim  on  Naples.  In  celebra- 
tion of  this  alliance,  the  visit  to  Rome  of  another  Neapoli- 
tan princess  was  made  the  occasion  of  an  entertainment 
by  the  cardinal  nephews,  which  in  lavish  splendor  and 
ingenious  extravagance  amazed  even  the  spectacle-sated 
Italians  and  became  a  matter  of  comment  in  all  the  courts 
of  Europe. 

It  is  easy  to  conceive  of  the  effect  produced  upon 
Wessel  by  this  misuse  of  his  high  office  by  his  friend 
Sixtus.  He  was  doubtless  astonished  to  witness  the 
rapidity  with  which  the  temptations  of  papal  power  could 
convert  a  scholarly  monk  into  an  intriguing  politician. 
However  highly  he  may  have  regarded  his  friend  as 


riaaiiaaaiiii 


Pope  Sixtus  IV  Holding  an  Audience 

From  a  painting  by  Melozzo  da  Forii,  in  the  Vatican 


Later  Manhood  85 

Cardinal  Rovere,  he  could  not  withhold  his  severe  dis- 
approval of  him  as  Pope  Sixtus  IV.  He  did  not  permit 
his  friendship  or  gratitude  for  past  favors  to  blind  his 
judgment ;  and  in  his  writings  there  is  a  significant  silence 
regarding  his  intimacy  with  this  pope  whose  policy  he  so 
heartily  condemned.  It  is  stated  by  early  biographers  of 
Wessel  that  he  was  for  a  time  private  physician  to  Sixtus. 
There  seems  to  be  no  adequate  reason  to  deny  this,  fori 
Wessel's  unusual  skill  in  medicine  is  beyond  question.  | 
There  is  one  characteristic  incident  in  Wessel's  relation 
to  his  friend,  after  he  became  pope,  which  practically  all 
his  biographers  report.  When  he  called  upon  the  new 
pope  to  present  his  congratulations,  he  was  asked  what 
favors  he  would  like  to  have  conferred  upon  him,  and 
made  this  reply:  "Most  holy  father,  my  kind  and  just 
patron,  there  is  nothing  with  which  I  would  greatly  burden 
your  Holiness.  I  have  never  sought  great  honors,  as  you 
know;  but  since  you  now  sustain  the  character  of  the 
Supreme  Priest  and  Shepherd  upon  earth,  I  pray  that 
your  reputation  may  correspond  with  your  name;  and  that 
you  may  so  administer  your  high  office  that  when  the 
great  Shepherd  of  the  sheep,  whose  chief  servant  on  earth 
you  are,  shall  come,  he  may  say:  "Well  done,  good  and 
faithful  servant;  enter  thou  into  the  joy  of  thy  Lord." 
And  you  fearlessly  may  say:  "  Lord,  thou  deliveredst 
unto  me  five  talents:  lo,  I  have  gained  other  five  talents." 
Sixtus  replied:  "This  shall  be  my  concern;  do  you  ask 
something  for  yourself."  "Well  then,"  said  Wessel,  "I 
beg  you  to  give  me  a  Greek  and  a  Hebrew  Bible  from  the 
Vatican  library."  "These  shall  be  given  to  you,"  said 
Sixtus.  "But,  you  foolish  man,  why  do  you  not  ask  for 
a  bishopric  or  something  similar?"  Wessel  answered: 
' '  Because  I  do  not  need  it. ' '  The  much-desired  manuscript 
of  the  Bible  in  the  original  tongues  was  given  to  him, 
and  was  added  to  the  little  library  that  he  appears  to 


86  Wessel  Gansfort 

have  carried  about  with  him.  It  was  taken  by  him  to  the 
convent  in  his  native  Groningen  where  he  spent  his  last 
days,  and  there  was  treasured  for  a  long  time.  Frag- 
ments of  it  were  there  to  be  seen  as  late  as  the  middle  of 
the  seventeenth  century.  It  has  been  assumed  that  it 
was  his  friendship  for  Wessel  that  led  Sixtus,  in  the 
second  year  of  his  pontificate,  to  give  papal  sanction  to  the 
Brethren  of  the  Common  Life.  This  may  be  true,  but  a 
pope  as  much  interested  as  was  Sixtus  in  advancing 
education  would  naturally  have  been  disposed  to  show 
favor  to  an  institution  which  had  contributed  so  many 
of  the  leading  scholars  of  his  day. 

It  is  evident  that  Rome,  in  spite  of  the  friendship  of 
the  pope  and  others  high  in  ecclesiastical  circles,  was  not 
a  comfortable  place  for  a  man  of  Wessel's  independence 
of  mind  and  rather  austere  moral  code.  The  life  of  the 
city  was  rent  by  turbulent  factions,  whose  fortresses 
and  garrisons  constantly  threatened  an  outbreak  of  vio- 
lence. The  populace  was  as  fickle  in  its  favor  as  it  was 
abject  in  its  devotion  to  the  hero  or  patron  of  the  hour. 
The  crowd  that  had  gathered  to  cheer  Sixtus  on  his  coro- 
nation day  became  suddenly  angered  by  a  delay  in  the 
procession,  and  even  began  to  throw  stones  at  the  papal 
litter!  To  live  thus  in  the  midst  of  alarms  must  have 
been  distasteful  in  the  extreme  to  one  who  had  always 
been  accustomed  to  the  quiet  atmosphere  of  the  schools. 

Especially  repugnant  to  Wessel  must  have  been  the 
gross  immorality  of  the  papal  city.  Its  condition,  at  the 
time,  was  a  scandal  to  Christendom.  Those  who  are 
familiar  with  modern  Rome,  clean,  well-governed,  orderly, 
and  at  least  outwardly  decent,  can  hardly  conceive  of  the 
unrestrained  disorder  and  vice  which  characterized  Rome 
of  the  fifteenth  century,  and  made  it  a  moral  plague- 
spot.  As  it  was  constantly  visited  by  ecclesiastics  and 
politicians  from  all  parts  of  Europe,  its  low  ideals  of  life 


Later  Manhood  87 

tended  to  infect  society  generally.  But  what  may  well 
have  proven  most  shocking  to  Wessel  was  the  demoraliza- 
tion of  those  in  highest  ecclesiastical  station.  Petrarch 
during  his  residence  at  Avignon  had  said  that  all  that  had 
been  written  of  the  gates  of  hell  might  well  be  applied  to 
the  papal  court  there.  It  may  be  doubted  whether  the 
papal  court  at  Rome  in  the  latter  part  of  the  fifteenth 
century  was  any  improvement  on  that  at  Avignon.  The 
prevalent  system  of  ecclesiastical  preferment  tended  to 
surround  the  pope,  who  might  himself  be  a  man  of  ir- 
reproachable life,  with  courtiers  and  sycophants  whose 
chief  aim  was  to  gratify  their  ambition  or  turn  the  golden 
stream  of  church-revenue  into  their  private  coffers,  or  lead 
the  life  of  a  voluptuary.  The  favorite  nephew  of  Sixtus 
affords  a  striking  example  of  this  type  of  papal  courtier. 
His  spectacular  career  of  extravagance  and  self-indulgence 
was  cut  short  by  the  death  of  a  debauchee  at  twenty- 
eight,  after  he  had  been  cardinal  but  three  years. 

It  is  not  altogether  uncommon  to  find  moral  laxity 
masking  itself  behind  an  intolerant  orthodoxy.  And  it  is 
not  strange  that  in  Rome  with  all  its  fiagiant  immorality 
there  were  those  who  were  violently  opposed  to  any 
variation  from  dogmatic  uniformity.  Wessel,  who  was  as 
distinguished  for  his  piety  as  for  his  learning,  found  himself, 
because  of  his  freedom  in  theological  speculation,  an  object 
of  suspicion.  He  was  pointed  at  as  a  man  who  held 
revolutionary  ideas,  and  yet  was  given  no  opportunity  to 
state  and  defend  his  views.  After  his  friend  became  pope, 
Wessel  was  apparently  a  resident  in  the  papal  palace  / 
and  was  under  papal  patronage  and  protection.  But 
before  that,  his  position  was  less  secure  and  his  views 
more  subject  to  criticism  or  ridicule.  In  a  letter,  written 
a  long  time  afterward,  Wessel  describes  a  social  occasion 
on  which  an  effort  was  made  to  embarrass  him  by 
the  implication  that  he  held  unsound  views   regarding 


88  Wessel  Gansfort 

indulgences.     The  incident  occurred  soon  after  he  came  to 
Rome.     He  with  several  other  scholars  from  Paris  were 
invited  to  dine  by  the  pope's  chamberlain.     Apparently 
there  were  many  prominent  men  present.      In  the  course 
of  the  dinner  one  of  the  Parisian  theologians  called  atten- 
tion to  Wessel 's  strange  views  on  indulgences,  and  expressed 
the  wish  that  one  of  their  colleagues  at  Paris,  a  former 
disputant  of  Wessel' s,  might  have  been  there  to  discuss 
the  matter  with  him.     A  smile  passed  around  the  table; 
but   the  host,   to   prevent   any   embarrassment    to    his 
guest,  closed  the  incident  by  saying:     "That  is  nothing 
new."     Later,  however,  Wessel  freely  stated  his  position 
regarding  indulgences,   and  was  surprised  to  find  that 
there  were  those,  even  in  high  ecclesiastical  circles,  who 
held  views  far  more  advanced  than  his  own.     For,  as  was 
noticed  above,  Humanism  in  Rome  had  tended  to  render 
some  of  its  adherents  critical  or  indifferent  to  Christian 
doctrine. 

Luther,  whose  visit  to  Rome  occurred  a  little  over  a 
generation  later,  found  skepticism  still  further  developed 
there.  He  was  shocked  to  discover  great  laxity  of  religious 
opinion  and  open  unbelief  among  those  in  confidential 
relations  with  the  pope.  It  is  impossible  not  to  contrast 
Wessel's  visit  to  Rome  with  that  of  Luther.  The  German 
was  younger,  less  sophisticated,  and  of  a  more  ardent  and 
demonstrative  nature.  He  had  long  desired  to  visit  the 
city  of  St.  Peter,  believing  that  some  unique  spiritual 
grace  was  there  to  be  obtained.  At  the  sight  of  the  city 
he  exclaimed:  "Hail  to  thee.  Holy  Rome!"  and  prostrated 
himself  upon  the  ground.  After  transacting  the  business 
for  his  order  which  had  brought  him  thither,  he  made 
general  confession,  climbed  the  Scala  Sancta,  made  a 
reverent  pilgrimage  of  the  churches  and  the  catacombs, 
and  believed  implicitly  the  fabulous  tales  told  him  by  his 
guides.     He  even  wished  that  his  parents  were  dead,  so 


Later  Manhood  89 

that  he  might  at  this  advantageous  place  say  masses  and 
do  penance  for  their  release  from  purgatory.  This  he 
used  to  recall  with  indignation.  Yet  his  eyes  were  not 
wholly  blind  to  the  seamy  side  of  Roman  life,  though 
he  was  still  under  the  spell  of  its  traditional  sanctity, 
and  gave  little  thought  to  it  at  the  time.  He  noticed, 
however,  that  some  of  the  Roman  priests  rushed  through 
the  sacred  service  of  the  altar  with  such  indecent  haste 
that  they  celebrated  seven  masses  while  he  was  engaged 
in  one.  He  also  heard  from  them  expressions  of  frivolous 
unbelief,  and  saw  indications  of  their  corrupt  living. 
While  he  was  there,  the  pope  returned  from  a  sanguinary 
campaign  in  which  he  had  himself  conducted  the  siege  of 
a  town.  He  noted  with  astonishment  that  whenever  the 
pope  appeared  in  public  it  was  in  regal  magnificence:  the 
papal  cortege  resembled  a  triumphal  procession.  Never- 
theless, Luther  returned  to  Germany  apparently  unaffected 
by  what  he  had  seen,  still  venerating  the  Holy  City,  still 
obedient  to  the  Roman  hierarchy.  It  was  not  till  years 
after  that  he  was  to  say :  "I  would  not  have  missed  seeing 
Rome  for  a  hundred  thousand  florins,  for  I  might  have  felt 
some  apprehension  that  I  might  be  doing  injustice  to  the 
pope.     But  as  we  see,  we  speak!" 

There  is  no  indication  that  his  much  longer  stay  in 
Rome  made  any  such  lasting  impression  upon  Wessel. 
At  least  he  makes  few  allusions  to  it  in  his  writings.  He 
came  to  Rome  an  older  man  and  in  a  more  critical  spirit, 
already  disillusioned  as  to  the  peculiar  sanctity  of  the 
papal  hierarchy.  What  he  saw  simply  confirmed  what  he 
had  heard,  and  confirmed  also  his  opinion  that  the  author- 
ity of  a  priest  of  whatever  rank  depended  wholly  upon  his 
commanding  what  Christ  required.  It  was  in  this  spirit 
that  he  freely  criticised  the  evil  conduct  of  those  high  in 
ecclesiastical  station,  and  did  not  hesitate  even  to  condemn 
the  action  of  his  friend,  Sixtus  IV,  when  he  claimed  that 


90  Wessel  Gansfort 

his  exalted  office  exempted  him  from  the  obHgation  to 
keep  his  oath.  It  is  highly  creditable  to  him  that  he 
maintained  this  attitude  of  manly  independence  toward 
his  exalted  patron,  and  yet  did  not  sacrifice  his  friendship. 
Ten  years  later,  so  it  would  seem,  Sixtus,  then  near  the 
end  of  his  career,  invited  him  to  visit  Rome  again ;  but  he 
did  not  go. 

Wessel's  stay  in  Rome  could  not  have  exceeded  two  or 
three  years,  and  that  period  included  his  visits  to  Venice 
and  Florence.  Some  of  his  early  biographers  entertained 
the  idea  that  he  also  made  extended  journeys  in  Greece 
and  Egypt.  But  that  seems  highly  improbable,  if  not 
impossible.  Upon  leaving  Rome  in  1473  Wessel  appears 
to  have  gone  back  to  Paris,  and  to  have  remained  there 
in  the  neighborhood  of  a  year.  It  was  at  this  time  that 
he  made  the  acquaintance  of  Reuchlin,  then  a  youth. 
If  we  are  to  credit  the  statement  that  at  the  request  of 
Louis  XI  Wessel  and  some  others  undertook  to  bring 
about  a  settlement  of  the  long-standing  quarrel  between 
the  Nominalists  and  the  Realists  at  Paris,  this  is  the  time 
that  it  occurred.  It  is  evident  that  at  this  time  Wessel 
did  become  involved  in  serious  controversy  at  Paris,  so 
that  it  became  uncomfortable  and  perhaps  dangerous 
for  him  there.  It  has  been  stated  that  he  was  driven 
out  of  Paris  because  of  "his  severe  handling  of  the  super- 
stitions of  the  theologians."  However  that  may  be — 
and  it  is  not  improbable — it  was  during  the  year  1473 
that  his  friend  David  of  Burgundy,  Bishop  of  Utrecht, 
wrote  a  letter  to  him  in  which  he  urges  Wessel  to  come  to 
him  and  thus  alludes  to  the  peril  to  which  he  is  exposed : 
"  I  have  long  known  of  your  illustrious  ability  as  a  teacher, 
and  I  also  know  that  there  are  many  who  would  ruin  you. 
They  shall  never  do  it  so  long  as  I  am  alive  to  protect  you, 
so  come  soon,  that  I  may  talk  over  everything  with  you 
and  have  near  me  one  in  whom  I  delight  my  soul." 


Later  Manhood  91 

Evidently  Wessel's  position  in  Paris  at  this  time  was 
one  of  genuine  danger,  which  may  explain  his  removal 
soon  after  to  Basel,  where  he  resumed  his  intimacy  with 
Reuchlin.  He  does  not  appear  to  have  had  any  official 
relation  to  the  University,  but,  as  formerly  at  Paris, 
he  privately  taught  theology  and  Greek  and  Hebrew. 
There  was  at  Basel  a  remarkable  library  collected  by  Nicho- 
las of  Ragusa  during  the  years  that  the  Reforming  Council 
was  in  session  there,  and  this  may  have  attracted  Wessel. 
But  Wessel's  residence  in  Basel,  where  Erasmus  chose  to 
end  his  days  because  of  its  scholarly  and  liberal  atmos- 
phere, was  not  to  be  long.  In  1477  he  was  called  by 
Philip,  Elector  of  the  Palatinate,  to  the  chair  of  theology 
in  the  University  of  Heidelberg.  It  will  be  recalled  that 
more  than  twenty  years  before  he  had  received  a  similar 
call  from  Elector  Frederick. 

The  University  of  Heidelberg  was  nearly  a  century  old 
and  had  attained  considerable  distinction.  The  Electors 
had  made  provision  for  its  maintenance  and  development. 
Under  Philip,  whose  reign  began  in  1476,  it  enjoyed  a 
period  of  exceptional  prosperity.  This  liberal-minded 
prince  sought  to  adorn  his  court  by  surrounding  himself 
with  men  accomplished  in  science  and  literature.  He 
invited  some  of  the  most  noted  scholars  in  Germany  to 
occupy  chairs  of  instruction  in  his  university.  It  is 
indicative  of  his  liberal  spirit  that  he  should  have  chosen 
for  his  Faculty  of  Theology  a  man  of  Wessel's  well-known 
independence  of  thought.  Heidelberg  was  already  a  suc- 
cessful rival  to  Cologne,  which  resisted  the  New  Learning 
and  became,  in  matters  of  theology,  a  citadel  of  obscurant- 
ism, and  suffered  decline  in  consequence.  Heidelberg,  on  ] 
the  other  hand,  welcomed  the  New  Learning  and  was  to 
have  the  honor  of  training  many  men  who  became  leaders  ( 
in  the  Protestant  movement.  Most  prominent  among 
these  were  Philip  Melanchthon  and  Martin  Bucer. 


92  Wessel  Gansfort 

Wessel  was  fifty-seven  years  old  when  he  was  invited 
to  the  chair  of  Theology  at  Heidelberg.  Evidently  the 
position  attracted  him.  He  was  now  in  later  middle  life, 
with  views  matured,  and  was  willing  to  assume  the 
regular  duties  of  a  professorship  and  settle  down  to  the 
pleasant  routine  of  a  teacher's  life,  something  from  which 
he  had  hitherto  shrunk.  But  the  men  in  the  Faculty  of 
Theology  at  Heidelberg  did  not  share  the  Elector's 
liberality  of  spirit,  nor  did  they  relish  the  prospect  of 
having  this  famous  champion  in  theological  debate,  this 
"Master  of  Contradiction, "  this  free-lance  in  controversy, 
as  one  of  their  colleagues.  They  may  also  have  been 
somewhat  apprehensive  on  account  of  his  well-known 
deviations  from  current  theological  teaching.  Their 
attitude  reminds  one  of  the  demurrer  of  the  Theological 
Faculty  at  Berlin  when,  under  the  influence  of  Bismarck, 
Adolf  Harnack  was  called  thither  from  Marburg. 

The  theologians  at  Heidelberg  raised  a  technical  objec- 
tion to  Wessel's  teaching  among  them;  he  had  not  re- 
ceived the  degree  of  Doctor,  which  the  rules  of  the  Uni- 
versity required.  Evidently  the  Elector  did  not  think 
this  an  insuperable  obstacle,  but  in  order  to  comply 
with  the  letter  of  the  law  Wessel  volunteered  to  undergo 
an  examination  for  the  Doctor's  degree.  But  to  this  the 
theologians  objected  that  inasmuch  as  he  had  not  been 
ordained  to  the  priesthood  he  was  not  eligible  to  the 
degree  of  Doctor.  In  that  age  many  a  man,  without  a 
trace  of  genuine  piety,  had  received  ordination  as  a  means 
of  securing  some  coveted  office  or  honor.  JEnesiS  Sylvius, 
literary  adventurer,  politician  and  libertine,  had  thus  in 
later  life  opened  the  way  for  his  elevation  to  the  cardinal- 
ate  and  the  papal  throne.  But  Wessel  was  of  a  different 
temper;  he  had  withstood  the  persuasion  of  his  monkish 
friends,  and  had  waved  aside  the  many  advantages  that 
ordination  to   the  priesthood  would  have  offered  him. 


Later  Manhood  93 

.He  would  not  now  take  the  solemn  vows  of  the  priest 
merely  to  remove  a  technical  obstacle  to  his  teaching 
theology.  When  years  before  he  was  a  student  at  Zwolle 
he  had,  like  the  other  lads  there,  received  the  tonsure, 
but  on  leaving  the  school  he  discarded  this  mark  which 
the  Church  puts  upon  her  prospective  servants.  When 
asked  why  he  had  not  retained  the  tonsure,  which  many 
students  continued  to  wear,  though  they  had  no  intention 
of  entering  the  priesthood,  because  it  offered  them  a 
certain  standing  and  protection  and  also  exemption  from 
prosecution  in  the  secular  courts,  he  made  the  characteris- 
tic reply  that  he  needed  no  such  protection  as  he  "had 
no  fear  of  the  gallows,  so  long  as  he  kept  his  wits." 

Though  unwilling  to  remove  the  technical  obstacle  to 
his  teaching  theology  in  the  University,  he  was  retained 
presumably  through  the  influence  of  the  Elector,  as 
teacher  in  the  philosophical  department,  in  which  his 
Master's  degree  entitled  him  to  give  instruction.  Here 
for  two  or  three  years  he  taught  Greek  and  Hebrew  and 
philosophy.  From  any  of  these  subjects  the  way  lay 
open  to  discuss  theological  matters,  nor  did  Wessel  lose 
the  opportunity  to  express  his  opinions  on  the  doctrinal 
questions  of  the  day  or  to  present  his  criticisms  of  the 
administration  of  the  Church.  Just  at  this  time  the  old 
controversy  between  the  Realists  and  the  Nominalists 
had  been  renewed  at  Heidelberg  with  a  violence  which 
was  in  a  way  an  indication  of  the  active  intellectual  life 
of  the  institution.  As  was  often  the  case  among  the 
turbulent  students  in  the  medieval  universities — there 
being  no  athletic  sports  or  dueling  to  afford  an  outlet 
for  their  surplus  physical  energies — the  young  scholars  at 
Heidelberg  made  their  philosophical  differences  an  excuse 
for  frequent  combats  in  the  streets.  They  came  to  blows 
over  the  question  of  the  proper  use  of  the  vocative  case, 
and  the  Elector  had  to  forbid  their  debates  concerning  the 


94  Wessel  Gansfort 

immaculate  conception  of  the  Virgin.  If  Wessel  took  part 
in  these  heated  controversies,  and  it  is  difficult  to  believe 
that  he  was  able  to  refrain  from  such  an  indulgence  of  his 
lifelong  fondness  for  discussion,  he  was  certain  to  arouse 
the  bitter  enmity  of  some  of  his  colleagues.  In  fact 
there  are  those  who  affirm  that  it  was  because  of  the 
controversies  in  which  he  found  himself  involved  and  the 
consequent  hostility  of  some  of  his  fellow-teachers  that  he 
withdrew  from  the  University. 

But  there  is  another  explanation  of  his  comparatively 
short  stay  at  Heidelberg.  He  realized  that  by  remaining 
in  a  place  of  such  prominence  he  was  exposing  himself  to 
persecution.  He  was  known  to  hold  views  concerning 
indulgences  and  the  authority  of  the  pope  and  powers  of 
the  Church  and  the  efficacy  of  the  sacraments  quite 
different  from  those  commonly  held  and  taught.  He 
was  also  an  intimate  friend  of  John  of  Wesel,  who  was 
about  to  be  tried  and  condemned  for  heresy.  He  naturally 
felt  that  his  position,  with  enemies  among  his  colleagues, 
was  a  very  insecure  one.  A  little  later,  he  was  to  write  to 
a  friend :  "I  am  afraid  of  no  danger  that  I  might  have  to 
encounter  for  the  purity  of  the  faith."  But  the  situation 
at  Heidelberg,  with  the  theological  department  opposed 
to  him  and  the  attention  of  the  students  engrossed  in 
philosophical  controversies  in  which  he  had  but  a  waning 
interest,  offered  him  small  encouragement  to  stay.  Hence, 
sometime  before  1479  he  gave  up  his  position  in  the 
University,  which  like  that  of  some  other  academic  posi- 
tions of  the  time  carried  no  fixed  salary,  and  returned  to  his 
native  Groningen.  So  ended  Wessel's  relation  to  the 
schools,  in  which  more  than  forty  years  of  his  life  had 
been  spent. 

It  has  already  been  noticed  that  Heidelberg  was  to 
become  a  nursery  of  Protestant  leaders,  and  there  is 
reason  to  believe  that  Wessel's  liberalizing  influence  con- 


PT? 


h-l 

0> 

-l-l 

o 

0) 

<u 

s 

3 
1— > 

(1) 

X 

XI 

<; 

r/i 

aj 

a 

13 

hn 

<U 

n1 

> 

0 

^H 

Tl 

n 

y 

.ta 

04 

Tt 

C/l 

ll 

(U 

0) 

6 

1 

<! 

J3 

0 

H 

f/1 

1) 

, 

"S, 

a 

w 

nt 

0) 

X! 

S 

H 

^ 

t/J 

d 

0 

OJ 

bjo  ja 

.2 

i-i 

(^ 

a 

0 

J3 

r*) 

0 

ClJ 

> 

5 

9i 

•s 

•o 

Vl 

lU 

<u 

s 

0 

*«  H 


a 


Later  Manhood  95 

tributed  much  to  render  the  institution  hospitable  to 
evangelical  doctrine.  It  is  interesting  to  recall  that 
early  in  the  fifteenth  century  Jerome  of  Prague,  a  disciple 
of  Wiclif,  had  taken  the  Master's  degree  at  Heidelberg 
and  had  produced  great  excitement  there  by  posting  on 
the  doors  of  the  Church  of  St.  Peter  a  list  of  theses  much 
more  revolutionary  and  Protestant  than  those  which 
Luther  more  than  a  century  later  posted  upon  the  doors 
of  the  castle  church  in  Wittenberg.  The  University 
authorities  prohibited  him  from  discussing  his  theses  in 
public,  and,  the  fact  that  a  few  years  later  Jerome  was 
condemned  and  burned  as  a  heretic  by  the  Council  of 
Constance  no  doubt  also  tended  to  discredit  his  views. 
But  with  Wessel's  coming  to  Heidelberg  a  new  Hne  of  more 
liberal  influences  began.  Rudolph  Agricola,  also  a  native  of 
Groningen,  and  a  friend  and  disciple  of  Wessel,  spent  his 
last  years  there.  Reuchlin  was  also  for  a  time  there,  so  was 
Jacob  Wimpheling  whose  attacks  upon  the  monks  and 
advocacy  of  a  better  discipline  for  the  clergy  contributed 
somewhat  to  the  preparation  for  the  Reformation.  In 
the  next  generation  Melanchthon  was  a  student  there  and 
many  others  who  were  to  be  leaders  in  the  Protestant 
movement.  And  hither  also  in  J^8  Luther  came  and 
held  a  memorable  disputation. 

Lutheran  influence,  however,  was  not  destined  to  shape 
the  doctrinal  standards  of  the  Protestant  Church  of  the 
Palatinate.  The  Heidelberg  Catechism,  which  was  to 
become  the  most  widely-accepted  symbol  of  the  Reformed 
Churches  throughout  the  world,  was  the  product  of 
Heidelberg  itself.  While  it  is  true  that  Ursinus  and 
Olevianus  were  most  conspicuous  in  its  composition,  their 
work  was  done,  as  the  Elector  himself  declares,  "with  the 
counsel  and  assistance  of  our  whole  theological  faculty, 
also  all  superintendents  and  principal  Church  councilors." 
In  other  words,  the  Catechism  represents  the    type    of 


96  Wessel  Gansfort 

Protestantism  which  had  grown  up  in  the  Palatinate. 
As  such,  it  may  be  said  to  have  been  the  product,  in 
part  at  least,  of  influences  started  nearly  a  century  before 
by  Wessel  and  his  pupils  in  the  University.  Even  a 
cursory  reading  of  Wessel's  writings  will  serve  to  confirm 
the  impression  of  a  spiritual  kinship  between  him  and  the 
framers  of  the  Heidelberg  symbol. 


CHAPTER  VI 

HIS  LAST  YEARS 

On  leaving  Heidelberg  Wessel  appears  to  have  gone 
directly  to  the  region  of  his  birth,  with  the  purpose  of 
spending  the  remainder  of  his  life  there.  He  doubtless 
felt  the  strong  attraction  which  the  scenes  of  his  youth 
exert  upon  a  man  as  old  age  approaches.  Unless  we 
adopt  Muurling's  rather  improbable  view  that  Wessel 
retired  to  Groningen  in  the  interval  between  his  residence 
at  Basel  and  his  call  to  Heidelberg,  we  have  no  reason  to 
suppose  that  he  had  spent  any  considerable  time  in  his 
native  land  since  nearly  forty  years  before  he  had  left 
it  to  enter  Cologne  University.  He  was  now  sixty  years 
of  age  and  was  doubtless  weary  of  the  wandering  life  and 
academic  conflicts  to  which  he  had  once  been  devoted, 
and  longed  for  a  more  quiet  existence  and  the  opportunity 
to  crystallize  his  views  and  give  them  permanent  presenta- 
tion on  the  written  page. 

But  another  consideration  must  have  had  much  weight 
in  the  forming  of  his  decision  to  return  to  Groningen.  He 
had  made  enemies,  both  among  the  monks  whose  super- 
stitions he  had  ridiculed  and  among  the  theologians,  whose 
teachings  he  had  combated.  He  had  found  Paris  unsafe 
and  Heidelberg  uncomfortable.  He  well  knew  the  fate 
of  the  heretic  and  believed,  probably  with  good  reason, 
that  the  inquisitors  who  had  begun  process  against  his 
friend,  John  Burchard  of  Wesel,  for  many  years  a  fearless 

VOL  1—7  97 


98  Wessel  Gansfort 

preacher  of  righteousness  at  Worms,  would  soon  turn  their 
attention  to  him.  In  February,  1479,  Burchard  was  ar- 
raigned, on  the  charge  of  heretical  teaching,  before  a 
Court  of  Inquisition  held  in  the  Franciscan  Monastery 
at  Mainz,  the  seat  of  the  Archbishop.  He  was  then  an 
aged  man  and  feeble,  and  had  been  further  weakened  by 
imprisonment  and  anxiety.  After  some  wavering  he  en- 
deavored to  make  his  peace  with  the  inquisitors  by 
recantation.  He  thus  escaped  the  fire,  but  was  con- 
demned to  imprisonment  for  the  rest  of  his  life,  which 
fortunately  proved  short.  It  is  to  be  noted  that  his  chief 
offence  was  his  attack  upon  indulgences,  which  Wessel 
had  also  attacked,  and  that  among  his  inquisitors  were 
members  of  the  theological  faculty  at  Heidelberg,  men 
whose  enmity  Wessel  had  good  reason  to  fear. 

Hence  it  seems  altogether  probable  that  the  chief  con- 
sideration which  led  Wessel  to  leave,  just  at  this  time, 
the  conspicuous  position  of  professor  of  philosophy  at 
Heidelberg  and  to  retire  to  remote  Groningen  in  the 
diocese  of  his  friend  the  Bishop  of  Utrecht  was  the  very 
natural  apprehension  that  if  he  remained  in  his  professor- 
ship he  might  at  any  moment  be  seized  and  tried  for  heresy. 
This  is  made  quite  evident  by  a  letter  which  he  wrote  in 
April,  1479,  from  Zwolle  to  the  dean  at  Utrecht,  a  friend 
of  his,  who  possessed  great  legal  knowledge  and  experience 
in  ecclesiastical  trials.  In  this  extremely  interesting  letter 
he  expresses  his  lively  sympathy  with  Master  John  of 
Wesel  then  in  the  hands  of  the  inquisitors,  and  urges  his 
friend  to  advise  him  how  to  proceed  in  case  the  inquisitors 
begin  process  against  him,  as  he  has  been  informed  they 
are  about  to  do.  The  letter  concludes  thus:  "I  beg 
of  you  to  reply  quickly,  in  order  that  you  may 
abundantly  refresh  one  who  thirsts  for  your  advice  and 
trusts  no  less  to  the  wisdom  of  your  counsels  than  to  the 
justice  of  his  cause.     I  do  not  fear  anything  that  I  may 


Last  Years  99 

have  to  undergo  for  the  purity  of  the  faith — if  only  there 
be  no  calumny.  As  I  have  revealed  these  matters  to  you 
in  confidence,  conceal  them,  I  entreat  you,  from  all  others." 
It  is  not  improbable  that  he  may  have  also  written  to  the 
bishop  of  Utrecht  reminding  him  of  his  promise  of  pro- 
tection given  six  years  before  when  he  was  in  danger  of  an 
attack  from  enemies  in  Paris.  Be  that  as  it  may,  the 
threatened  inquisition  did  not  take  place,  and  Wessel 
enjoyed  ten  years  of  tranquillity  and  perfect  freedom  to 
write  and  teach. 

His  home-coming  to  Groningen  was  in  the  nature  of  a 
triumph.  The  joy  and  pride  with  which  he  was  welcomed 
by  his  countrymen  were  suitably  voiced  in  a  Latin  panegy- 
ric ode  written  by  the  President  of  the  Gymnasium  at 
Zwolle.  It  celebrates  "the  happy  return  from  Italy  of 
that  most  eminent  and  admirable  philosopher.  Master 
Wessel  of  Groningen."  The  mention  of  Italy  and  the 
allusion  in  the  ode  to  Italian  cities  that  had  competed 
for  the  honor  of  Wessel's  residence  might  seem  to  imply 
that  a  sojourn  in  Italy  had  intervened  between  his  leaving 
Heidelberg  and  going  to  Groningen.  But  it  seems  more 
probable  that  the  author,  with  some  poetic  license,  was 
simply  contrasting  Italy,  the  source  of  the  New  Learning, 
with  the  Germanic  lands  into  which  Wessel  and  others 
were  introducing  it.  The  ode,  which  is  itself  an  example 
of  the  pedantry  which  the  New  Learning  tended  to  foster, 
may  be  paraphrased  as  follows : 

"Thrice  welcome  home,  thou  scholar  far-renowned, 
Of  Letters  Prince,  most  favored  of  the  Muse, 
Beloved  alike  by  God  and  Fatherland, 
Teutonia's  glory,  whom  she  hails  with  joy. 
Greetings  to  thee,  and  honor,  and  such  praise 
As  only  the  Pierian  Nine  can  sing. 
At  last,  thou  deign'st  our  poor  retreats  to  grace, 
And  lendest  splendor  to  our  humble  walls: 


100  Wessel  Gansfort 

In  vain  did  Venice  and  most  mighty  Rome 

And  Florence  fair  entreat  thee  to  remain; 

Nor  hast  thou  on  thy  country  hitherto 

Conferred  the  honor  of  thy  residence. 

But  now,  we  trust,  thou  wilt  with  us  abide, 

To  teach  our  youth  the  polished  Roman  speech, 

And  guide  them  through  the  Greek  and  Hebrew  maze; 

To  be  our  Galen,  vanquishing  disease, 

Our  second  Vergil  and  our  Cicero: 

Then  shall  thine  own  Germanic  Lands  rejoice 

And  praise  high  Heaven  for  such  a  priceless  gift, 

For  thou  shalt  bless  them  with  the  boon  of  Health, 

And  with  the  liberal  arts  their  fame  enhance." 

If  those  who  thus  eulogistically  welcomed  Wessel  home 
expected  to  receive  benefit  from  his  presence  among  them, 
they  were  not  to  be  disappointed.  For  their  famous 
countryman  had  not  simply  come  home  to  die,  as  many  a 
distinguished  man  has  done,  but  the  ten  years  that 
remained  to  him  were  in  many  respects  the  most  fruitful 
of  his  life.  He  still  carried  on  his  theological  studies, 
enjoyed  association  with  influential  men,  and  possessed 
the  always  coveted  opportunity  to  mingle  with  students 
and  impart  to  them  the  truth  which  he  had  gained. 
Distinguished  scholars  from  abroad  visited  him,  and  an 
extensive  correspondence  with  his  friends  and  students  of 
other  years  kept  him  acquainted  with  the  progress  of 
thought  in  the  educational  centers  in  which  he  had  once 
been  a  well-known  figure.  Though  he  had  withdrawn 
to  remote  Frisia  he  had  not  fallen  out  of  the  life  of  his 
time.  This  is  strikingly  illustrated  by  the  fact  that  it 
was  while  he  was  living  in  Groningen  that  his  friend,  Pope 
Sixtus  IV,  invited  him  to  make  his  residence  at  the  papal 
court.  It  is  also  certain  that  many  if  not  all  of  his  writings 
that  we  possess  belong  to  this  last  period  of  his  life.  Some 
of  them,  as  for  example  the  Scala  Meditationis,  dedicated 


Last  Years  loi 

to  the  monks  of  Mount  Saint  Agnes,  and  many  of  his 
letters,  bear  clear  internal  evidence  of  this. 

Although  Wessel  had  refused  the  monastic  life  for 
himself,  and  had  said  and  written  much  in  its  criticism, 
yet  in  the  Netherlands  the  relation  of  piety  and  learning 
to  the  cloister  was  such  that  the  convents  afforded  him 
his  most  natural  asylum.  Here  he  found  a  quiet  at- 
mosphere of  scholarly  leisure,  collections  of  books,  and  the 
fellowship  of  those  interested  in  the  cultivation  of  the  life 
of  the  spirit.  Here  he  also  found  pupils,  without  which  he 
could  hardly  have  been  content — so  strong  within  him 
was  the  instinct  of  the  teacher.  He  apparently  traveled 
about  somewhat  in  the  northern  Netherlands  visiting  his 
friends,  but  most  of  his  time  was  spent  in  three  convents, 
which  he  regarded  as  so  many  homes.  The  one  to  which 
he  first  went  after  his  final  departure  from  Heidelberg 
was  that  of  the  nuns  of  Saint  Clara  in  Groningen.  They 
are  usually  spoken  of  as  the  Spiritual  Virgins.  Their 
cloister  was  in  the  center  of  the  city.  In  the  profile  of 
medieval  Groningen  shown  in  one  of  the  illustrations  the 
spire  of  what  was  doubtless  their  chapel  appears  a  little 
to  the  left  of  the  tall  steeple  of  Saint  Martin's  Church. 
The  convent  buildings  have  been  used  of  recent  years  as 
an  orphan  hospital.  Wessel  was  recommended  to  the 
nuns  of  Saint  Clara  by  his  friend,  their  Bishop,  David  of 
Burgundy,  who  it  has  been  thought  compensated  the 
convent  for  his  entertainment.  The  nuns  regarded  him 
not  only  as  a  distinguished  guest  but  as  their  spiritual 
father.  He  gave  them  religious  instruction  and  composed 
devotional  books  for  their  use.  Inasmuch  as  he  appears 
to  have  spent  most  of  his  time  in  this  cloister  he  must 
have  deeply  appreciated,  especially  as  the  infirmities  of 
age  approached,  the  tender  care  of  the  sisters,  who  honored 
him  for  his  learning  and  revered  him  for  his  piety.  It  was 
here  that  his  last  illness  and  death  occurred,  and  in  the 


102  Wessel  Gansfort 

choir  of  the  convent  chapel  his  body  found  its  first  resting- 
place. 

A  mile  or  more  west  of  the  city — shown  also  in  the  profile 
just  mentioned — was  the  monastery  of  Adwerd,  famed  at 
the  time  for  the  beauty  of  its  buildings,  its  fine  library, 
and  popular  schools.  Its  buildings  long  ago  fell  a  prey 
to  the  flames  and  to  decay;  only  fragments  of  the  walls 
are  now  remaining.  A  part  of  its  library  is  possessed  by 
the  University  of  Groningen.  This  monastery  was  also 
one  of  Wessel's  homes  during  his  last  years.  He  was 
doubtless  more  attracted  by  its  library  and  its  schools  than 
by  its  monks,  though  he  also  concerned  himself  in  their 
spiritual  welfare.  It  was  a  custom  of  the  monastery  that 
during  meal-time  one  of  the  monks  should  read  aloud. 
He  found  that  the  books  being  thus  read  were  not  of  an 
edifying  character.  Though  ostensibly  religious  they 
were  filled  with  trivialities,  such  fables  and  superstitions 
as  were  later  to  attract  the  ridicule  of  Erasmus  and  his 
friends.  This  reading  was  one  of  the  chief  diversions  of 
the  monks,  but  it  wearied  and  disgusted  Wessel  almost 
beyond  endurance.  Yet  he  could  not  refrain  from 
smiling  now  and  then  at  some  characteristic  piece  of 
monkish  invention.  On  one  such  occasion  when  asked 
why  he  laughed  at  what  the  others  took  so  seriously,  he 
replied :  "I  am  laughing  at  these  barbarous  lies.  These 
books  are  filled  not  only  with  absurd  but  with  harmful 
notions.  The  Sacred  Scriptures  and  the  devotional  works 
of  Saint  Bernard  would  be  much  better  for  the  Brothers." 
Since  the  reading  of  these  worthless  writings  had  very 
largely  displaced  that  of  the  Bible,  Wessel  undertook  to 
restore  it  to  its  rightful  preeminence.  His  aim  was  not 
merely  to  induce  the  monks  to  read  the  Scriptures  but 
to  incite  in  them  a  desire  to  become  able  to  interpret 
them.  To  accomplish  this  he  used  to  read  the  Bible  to 
the  more  intelligent  of  the  monks  and  urge  them  to  ask 


Last  Years  103 

for  the  explanation  of  passages  that  they  did  not  under- 
stand. In  order  to  encourage  them  to  study  Hebrew  and 
Greek  he  used  to  point  out  the  inaccuracies  of  the  Vulgate 
translation,  and  ask  for  the  originals  that  he  might  give 
them  a  more  exact  rendering.  Sometimes,  at  their  re- 
quest, he  would  read  from  the  Hebrew  Bible,  when  they 
would  be  greatly  impressed  by  the  strange,  unintelligible 
words  uttered  by  their  aged  teacher.  To  the  younger 
monks  he  dehghted  to  expound  the  Psalms  which  they 
chanted  in  course  in  the  daily  services  of  the  chapel.  It 
was  his  custom,  also,  on  the  evenings,  after  the  celebration 
of  the  mass,  to  read  aloud  the  passages  in  the  gospels  con- 
taining the  account  of  the  institution  of  the  sacrament 
and  our  Lord's  discourses  connected  with  it.  But  toward 
the  end,  his  sight,  always  defective,  so  failed  that  these 
long  readings  to  the  monks  became  difficult  or  impossible. 
But  the  field  of  Wessel's  greatest  service  to  the  monas- 
tery and  the  occasion  doubtless  of  his  greatest  delight 
was  the  school  or  rather  the  schools  which  Adwerd  had 
long  maintained.  The  one  gave  only  elementary  instruc- 
tion, but  the  other  taught  such  advanced  subjects  as 
philosophy  and  theology.  In  fact,  one  early  writer 
affirmed  that  Adwerd  was  not  so  much  a  monastery  as  an 
academy.  As  far  back  as  the  thirteenth  century  it  had 
distinguished  foreigners  among  its  teachers.  At  the  time 
of  Wessel's  coming  it  had  somewhat  declined,  but  his 
presence  gave  a  fresh  impetus  to  its  life.  Not  only  did 
the  number  of  its  students  increase,  but  learned  men  from 
all  the  region  ' '  were  accustomed  to  spend  weeks  and  even 
months  at  Adwerd  in  order  to  hear  and  understand  that 
which  would  make  them  daily  more  learned  and  better 
men."  As  elsewhere,  Wessel  encouraged  at  Adwerd  the 
study  of  Greek  and  Hebrew  and  the  classics.  He  dis- 
paraged the  current  method  of  theological  instruction 
and  directed  the  students  away  from  the  scholastic  writers 


104  Wessel  Gansfort 

to  the  Scriptures  and  the  eariy  Fathers.  With  great 
assurance  he  used  to  predict  that  his  students  would  live 
to  see  Thomas  Aquinas  and  Bonaventura  and  all  the 
later  wranglers  in  theology  discarded  by  the  best  scholars, 
saying  that  "all  these  irrefutable  Doctors,  black  and 
white-cowled  alike,  will  soon  find  their  proper  level." 

It  was  by  thus  exciting  in  his  students  the  hope  of  a 
better  day,  not  only  for  theological  science  but  for  the 
Church,  and  directing  them  away  from  the  barren  scho- 
lasticism of  the  time  to  a  fresh  study  of  the  sources  of 
Christian  truth,  that  Wessel  enabled  the  more  able  and 
earnest  young  men  at  Adwerd  to  assist  in  bringing  about 
the  better  conditions  that  he  predicted.  Not  only  did  the 
school  greatly  improve,  so  that  it  attracted  students  from 
long  distances,  but  a  better  spirit  was  also  manifest  in  the 
monastery  itself.  Nor  did  Wessel's  influence  at  Adwerd 
cease  with  his  death.  Hardenberg,  visiting  the  monastery 
many  years  after,  wrote :  "At  that  time  there  were  in  the 
monastery  many  examples  of  the  better  cloister  life;  and 
so  long  as  the  memory  of  Wessel  was  revered,  and  those 
who  had  been  his  students  lived,  this  continued  to  be  the 
case." 

Of  the  incidents  recorded  concerning  his  life  at  Adwerd, 
two  have  special  interest  as  reported  by  eye-witnesses. 
Among  the  distinguished  men  who  visited  there  was  a 
Parisian  Doctor,  who  was  placed  with  Wessel  and  others 
at  the  Abbot's  table.  Even  while  they  were  dining  the 
new  guest  began  to  ply  Wessel  with  questions  to  which, 
feeling  that  the  time  was  unsuited  to  the  discussion  of  such 
matters,  he  made  no  reply.  But  dinner  being  over, 
Wessel  encouraged  him  to  resume  his  inquiries  and  to  his 
most  difficult  questions  made  such  clear  and  illuminating 
replies  that  in  astonishment  he  left  his  place  at  the  table 
and  kneeling  before  him  with  uncovered  head  exclaimed: 
' '  Either  you  are  a  second  Alanus  or  an  angel  from  heaven 


Last  Years  105 

or  another  being  whom  I  will  not  risk  to  name.  Blessed 
be  God,  my  expectation  has  not  been  disappointed.  I 
have  not  sought  you  in  vain,  nor  was  it  without  reason 
that  the  Master  of  Contradiction  was  admired  and  hated 
by  those  of  the  Sorbonne!" 

The  other  glimpse  of  Wessel's  life  at  Adwerd  is  pre- 
served for  us  by  Goswin,  who  at  the  time  was  among  the 
younger  monks  in  the  monastery  and  a  familiar  attendant 
upon  Wessel.  He  reports  that  he  was  frequently  present 
at  conversations  between  Agricola  and  Wessel  in  which 
they  lamented  the  darkness  resting  upon  the  Church, 
condemned  the  common  irreverence  at  mass  and  the 
celibacy  of  the  clergy,  discussed  Paul's  doctrine  that 
men  are  justified  not  by  works  but  by  faith,  and  denied 
the  authority  which  had  become  attached  to  mere  human 
traditions.  He  further  states  that  he  had  often  served 
at  the  table  where  both  of  them  reclined  and  had  later 
lighted  them  to  bed.  Sometimes  Agricola  was  so  under 
the  influence  of  liquor  that  he  had  to  draw  off  his  boots 
for  him,  "but  no  one  ever  saw  Wessel  in  that  state." 

Wessel's  third  home  was  at  ZwoUe,  where  he  had  studied 
as  a  boy  in  the  school  of  the  Brethren  of  the  Common 
Life.  The  Bishop  of  Utrecht  had  made  some  arrange- 
ment for  his  entertainment  in  the  neighboring  Augustinian 
monastery  of  Mount  Saint  Agnes,  which  under  the  per- 
suasion of  Thomas  a  Kempis  he  once  thought  seriously 
of  entering.  Here  he  spent  a  considerable  portion  of 
each  year,  partly  because  of  his  strong  attachment  to  the 
region  and  partly  that  he  might  be  accessible  to  his  friend 
the  Bishop,  whose  summer  home  at  Vollenhove  on  the 
Zuyder  Zee  was  less  than  twenty  miles  distant.  When  a 
youth,  Wessel  had  made  frequent  visits  to  the  monastery 
whose  famous  prior,  Thomas  of  blessed  memory,  had 
honored  him  with  his  friendship.  Thomas  had  lived  to 
the  advanced  age  of  ninety-one,  dying  in  1471,  less  than  a 


io6  Wessel  Gansfort 

decade  before  Wessel's  return  to  the  Netherlands,  The 
influence  of  his  deep  mystical  piety  and  of  his  long  and 
wise  administration  of  the  monastery  had  given  to  Mount 
Saint  Agnes  a  place  of  distinction  among  the  cloisters  of 
northern  Europe.  Thomas  was  concerned  for  the  in- 
tellectual as  well  as  the  spiritual  culture  of  his  monks, 
had  built  up  a  creditable  library,  and  had  encouraged  the 
more  promising  youth  to  undertake  classical  as  well  as 
biblical  studies.  Among  those  who  had  received  inspira- 
tion from  him  in  their  student  days  were  such  notable 
leaders  of  the  New  Learning  as  Agricola  and  Hegius. 

It  may  be  assumed  that  Wessel  found  at  Mount  Saint 
Agnes  many  men  of  kindred  spirit  and  abundant  opportu- 
nity to  cultivate  in  the  monks  the  same  love  of  the  Scrip- 
tures and  practice  of  vital  piety  which  he  encouraged  at 
Adwerd.  One  incident  in  his  relations  with  the  monks 
at  Mount  Saint  Agnes  illustrates  their  need  of  instruction 
in  order  to  distinguish  between  the  form  and  the  substance 
of  prayer.  When  it  was  noticed  that  he  used  neither 
prayer  book  nor  rosary,  one  of  the  brothers  asked  him  if 
he  never  prayed.  He  replied:  "With  God's  help  I 
endeavor  to  pray  always.  Yet  each  day  I  repeat  the 
Lord's  Prayer,  a  prayer  so  pure  and  sublime  that  it  would 
be  sufficient  if  I  said  it  but  once  each  year."  During 
Wessel's  annual  sojourns  at  Mount  Saint  Agnes  he  was 
frequently  invited  to  visit  his  friend  and  patron  the 
Bishop  of  Utrecht,  who  prized  not  his  companionship 
only  but  also  his  recognized  medical  skill. 

When  a  generation  after  Wessel's  death,  Hardenberg 
visited  Mount  Saint  Agnes  he  found  some  of  his  friends 
and  former  pupils  still  there.  They  greatly  revered  the 
memory  of  their  famous  teacher  and  related  incidents 
showing  his  learning  and  piety  with  such  tenderness  of 
feeling  that  Hardenberg  found  it  difficult  to  restrain  his 
tears.     Some  of  the  monks  had  learned  a  little  Greek 


Last  Years  107 

and  Hebrew  from  him,  and  possessed  books  in  both 
languages  that  he  had  given  them.  The  Scala  Medita- 
tionis  which  he  had  composed  for  them  assumed  some 
knowledge  of  Greek  on  the  part  of  the  reader.  Wessel 
was  accustomed  to  write  to  his  friends  in  the  monastery 
and  one  letter  from  this  correspondence,  that  to  John 
of  Amsterdam,  still  survives.  Hardenberg  was  shown 
Wessel's  Hebrew  Psalter  and  Greek  Nazianzen,  and 
fragments  of  his  own  writings;  but  his  Mare  Magnum, 
which  had  been  long  in  the  possession  of  the  monastery, 
had  been  loaned  and  so  lost.  Of  the  monastery  itself 
there  now  remains  hardly  a  trace,  and  if  it  were  not  for 
the  sHght  elevation  of  land  on  which  it  stood,  it  would  be 
difficult  to  determine  its  site.  Like  many  another  famous 
cloister  in  the  Netherlands  it  was  destroyed  during  the 
wars  of  religion  that  accompanied  the  Reformation. 

It  is  interesting  to  notice  who  were  prominent  among 
the  friends  and  pupils  of  Wessel  during  this  last  stadium 
of  his  career.  Most  notable  among  them  because  of  his 
official  position  was  the  Bishop  of  Utrecht,  whose  name 
in  secular  life  was  David  of  Burgundy.  He  was  a  natural 
son  of  Philip  the  Good  and  hence  a  half  brother  of  the 
powerful  and  ambitious  prince,  Charles  the  Bold.  It  was 
indicative  of  the  extent  of  Burgundian  influence  over 
affairs  in  the  Netherlands  that  Duke  Philip  could  have 
forced  his  bastard  son  into  the  important  see  of  Utrecht, 
to  which  another  had  been  regularly  elected.  It  required 
an  army  to  set  David  upon  the  episcopal  throne;  but  in 
the  end  he  overcame  all  opposition  and  ruled  as  Bishop 
for  forty  years.  He  had  the  vices  and  the  virtues  that 
belonged  to  his  age  and  station,  and  in  spite  of  some 
serious  defects  of  character  had  a  rather  successful  career. 
He  protected  the  rights  and  properties  of  the  Church  from 
civil  encroachment,  was  a  patron  of  the  arts  and  sciences, 
and  a  friend  of  learned  men.     It  was  perhaps  due  to 


io8  Wessel  Gansfort 

Wessel's  influence  that  he  undertook  the  difficult  task  of 
reforming  clerical  education.  His  attempt  to  raise  the 
standard  of  intelligence  among  candidates  for  orders  by 
requiring  them  to  undergo  a  public  examination  proved 
rather  disappointing.  Among  three  hundred  who  at 
one  time  underwent  such  examination  only  three  acquitted 
themselves  creditably.  At  the  evident  disgust  of  the 
Bishop,  some  clerical  bystander  said  apologetically: 
"These  times  do  not  yield  Augustines  and  Jeromes."  To 
which  the  Bishop  indignantly  retorted:  "No,  but  they 
need  not  be  blockheads  and  bottomless  pits  of  ignorance." 
The  Bishop's  attachment  to  Wessel  was  one  of  long 
standing.  A  letter  of  his  written  from  Vollenhove  in 
1473,  given  in  full  elsewhere,  promises  Wessel  protection 
from  his  enemies  and  urges  him  to  make  him  a  visit, 
saying,  ' '  I  am  eager  to  have  near  me  a  spirit  in  which  I  take 
delight."  It  is  suggestive  of  the  tolerant  spirit  of  Wessel 
and  his  lack  of  pharisaical  pride  that  he  should  have  recip- 
rocated the  friendship  and  accepted  the  patronage  of  this 
secular-spirited  Bishop  whose  personal  life  was  a  matter 
of  public  criticism  and  whose  administration  of  his  high 
office  was  in  many  respects  alien  to  Wessel's  principles. 
Wessel  had  another  friend  connected  with  the  cathedral 
at  Utrecht.  It  was  to  him,  "The  Honorable  Lord  Master 
Ludolph  van  Veen,  Dean  of  the  celebrated  church  at 
Utrecht  and  Doctor  of  both  Laws,"  that  he  had  written 
when  he  believed  himself  to  be  threatened  by  the  inquisitor. 
The  letter,  which  appears  elsewhere,  is  one  that  a  man 
would  not  write  except  to  a  friend  of  whose  loyalty  and 
devotion  he  had  no  doubt.  They  had  been  associated  in 
Paris  and  elsewhere,  and  their  long  friendship  was  reinforced 
by  the  fact  that  they  had  the  same  enemies.  Ludolph 's 
legal  knowledge  had  enabled  him  to  escape  them  and 
Wessel  appeals  to  him  to  use  it  on  his  behalf.  Apparently 
Ludolph  chose  to  invoke  the  aid  of  his  Bishop  instead. 


Last  Years  109 

Other  friends  and  correspondents  of  Wessel  were 
Jacob  Hoeck,  Dean  of  Naeldwick,  Bernard  of  Meppen, 
John  of  Amsterdam,  Engelbert  of  Leyden,  Gertrude  Rey- 
niers  of  Claras  Aquas,  and  another  nun  whose  name  we 
do  not  know  but  to  whom  Wessel  addressed  a  letter  which 
became  attached  to  the  treatise  on  the  Eucharist  and  so 
was  preserved.  And  to  these  friends  of  his  maturer  years 
should  be  added  many  of  the  youths  in  the  monasteries 
and  schools  which  he  frequented.  They  regarded  the  ven- 
erable scholar  with  a  filial  reverence  which  stimulated 
them  to  noble  living  and  inspired  not  a  few  of  them  to 
devote  themselves  to  the  tasks  of  Christian  scholarship. 
Among  these  two  deserve  special  notice,  Agricola  and 
Hegius.  The  former  was  a  native  of  Groningen,  who 
after  studying  at  Zwolle  and  Louvain  and  Paris  and 
later  in  Italy  became  one  of  the  chief  instruments  in 
awakening  an  interest  in  classical  studies  among  the 
Germanic  peoples.  The  latter  made  the  school  at  Deventer, 
of  which  for  a  quarter  of  a  century  he  was  the  distin- 
guished president,  one  of  the  chief  centers  of  classical 
learning  in  northern  Europe. 

Such  were  some  of  the  friendships  with  which  Wessel 
solaced  the  last  decade  of  his  life.  Though  he  was  much 
occupied  with  teaching  and  correspondence,  yet  he  gave 
most  of  his  time  to  the  tasks  of  authorship.  Such  writings 
of  his  as  have  been  preserved  fill  a  volume  of  nearly  a 
thousand  pages,  and  those  that  have  perished  were  ap- 
parently not  less  voluminous.  The  greater  part  of  these 
were  composed  during  his  residence  in  the  Netheriands. 
Much  time  was  also  occupied  in  conferences  with  visitors 
who  came  to  consult  him  upon  various  matters  and  in 
journeys  from  one  to  another  of  his  three  cloister  homes. 
It  was  a  busy  and  a  fruitful  life  far  removed  from  the 
violent  controversies  of  the  schools  and  undisturbed 
by  the  enemies  who  had  once  threatened  his  destruction. 


no  Wessel  Gansfort 

Never  robust  in  health,  he  nevertheless  retained  his 
faculties  unimpaired  till  near  to  the  appointed  limit  of 
threescore  years  and  ten.  With  his  own  hand,  in  a 
character  so  fine  that  it  was  hardly  legible,  he  wrote  the 
long  second  letter  to  Jacob  Hoeck;  and  until  his  last 
sickness  he  made  the  usual  circuit  of  the  convents  in 
which  he  was  such  a  welcome  guest.  Fortunately  his 
final  illness  overtook  him  while  in  the  cloister  at  Gronin- 
gen,  where  his  last  hours  were  cheered  by  the  loving 
ministries  of  the  nuns  whose  spiritual  father  he  had  been 
for  so  many  years. 

It  was  not  strange  that  in  the  weakness  of  his  last  days, 
the  specters  of  the  mind,  which  he  had  fearlessly  faced  all 
his  life  and  had  laid  in  many  a  fierce  combat,  should  have 
returned  for  a  time  to  darken  his  vision  of  the  truth  and 
obscure  his  assurance  of  immortality.  That  has  been  the 
hard  experience  of  some  of  the  world's  most  blameless 
souls.  But  in  Wessel's  case  the  lifelong  habit  of  prayer 
and  the  practice  of  simple  faith  triumphed  in  the  end, 
and  when  death  came  it  found  him  in  joyous  confidence 
of  immortality.  To  a  friend,  to  whom  on  an  earlier 
visit  he  had  confided  his  conflict  with  doubt,  he  said: 
"I  thank  God  all  the  vain  troublesome  thoughts  have 
gone,  and  I  know  naught  but  Jesus  Christ  and  him 
crucified."     These  are  his  last  recorded  words. 

He  died  on  October  4,  1489,  being  about  seventy  years 
of  age.  His  body  was  buried  near  the  altar  in  the  chancel 
of  the  convent  chapel.  This  record  of  his  death  appears 
in  the  Church  registry:  "In  the  year  of  the  Lord,  1489, 
died  the  venerable  Master  Wessel  Hermanni,  an  admirable 
teacher  of  sacred  theology,  well  versed  in  the  Latin,  Greek, 
and  Hebrew  tongues,  and  acquainted  with  philosophy  in 
all  its  branches."  For  more  than  a  hundred  years  not 
even  a  tablet  marked  his  grave,  but  in  the  seventeenth 
century  and  again  in  the  eighteenth  monuments  with  suit- 


A  Corridor  in  the  Convent  of  the  Spiritual  Virgins  Leading  into  the  Courtyard 

It  has  not  been  altered  since  Wessel  made  the  Convent  his  home 


Last  Years  m 

able  inscriptions  were  placed  over  his  resting  place.  But 
before  these  monuments  were  erected  his  grave  had 
become  to  some  degree  the  goal  of  pilgrimage  on  the  part 
of  his  ardent  admirers.  Hardenberg  met  two  such 
admirers  there  in  the  person  of  Sagarus,  the  famous 
jurist  and  the  councillor  of  Charles  V,  and  his  aged 
father.  The  former  declared  that  it  was  from  a  worn  copy 
of  Wessel's  treatise  on  the  Incarnation  and  the  Passion 
which  he  carried  constantly  in  his  pocket  that  he  had  come 
to  know  Christ.  He  thus  recounts  the  incident:  "I  went 
with  them  from  Adwerd  to  the  convent  of  the  Spiritual 
Virgins,  where  John  van  Halen,  the  director,  showed  us 
Wessel's  skull,  which  Sagarus  reverently  embraced  and 
kissed,  offering  the  nuns  ten  pounds  Flemish  if  he  might 
be  permitted  to  take  it  with  him.  But  some  of  the  aged 
superstitious  sisters  refused,  saying  that  they  had  once  seen 
books  and  manuscripts  of  his  burned  on  suspicion  of 
heresy,  and  they  were  afraid  that  the  stranger  might  be  a 
Lutheran  who  would  use  the  skull  as  an  object  of  worship 
and  to  practice  sorcery!" 

After  their  long  repose  in  the  chapel  of  the  cloister 
Wessel's  bones  were  removed  in  i860  to  the  venerable 
Church  of  St,  Martin,  where  they  now  rest.  It  happened 
that  members  of  the  American  branch  of  the  Gansfort 
family  were  at  Groningen  at  the  time  and  witnessed  the 
impressive  ceremonies  of  reinterment. 

As  all  the  writings  of  Wessel  that  survive  were  apparently 
the  product  of  his  last  years,  a  list  of  them  may  well  be 
given  here.  One  volume  of  921  pages,  published  at 
Groningen  in  16 14,  contains  them  all.  It  has  seven 
divisions,  as  follows:  i.  Concerning  Prayer,  with  an 
Exposition  of  the  Lord's  Prayer.  2,  Scala  Medita- 
tionis,  or  the  Training  of  Thought  and  Meditation.  3, 
Examples  of  the  above  dedicated  to  the  monks  of  Mount 
Saint  Agnes.     4,     The  Causes  of  the  Incarnation,  and 


115  Wessel  Gansfort 

the  Magnitude  of  the  Sufferings  of  our  Lord.  5,  The 
Sacrament  of  the  Eucharist.  6,  The  Farrago,  which 
has  six  sections  or  chapters.     7,     The  Letters. 

We  have  no  way  of  knowing  what  writings  of  Wessel 
were  destroyed  by  the  monks  who  soon  after  his  death 
seized  and  burned  his  literary  remains.  But  the  following 
books  also  escaped  and  were  still  in  existence  when  Harden- 
berg  wrote.  They  have  apparently  perished  since  through 
accident  or  neglect.  Leaving  out  of  account  writings 
that  can  only  doubtfully  be  attributed  to  Wessel,  the  list 
of  his  works  that  are  known  to  have  been  lost  since  the 
sixteenth  century  is  as  follows:  i,  Brief  Notes  on  the 
Bible  and  on  special  Passages,  on  Things  Created,  Angels, 
Demons,  the  Soul,  etc.  2,  An  extended  Treatise  on 
Ecclesiastical  Dignity  and  Power,  and  Indulgences.  3, 
For  the  Nominalists,  a  pamphlet.  4,  Christ's  Three 
Days  in  the  Tomb.  5,  Two  pamphlets  on  Practical 
Medicine.  6,  A  book  on  the  Coming  Age.  7,  The 
Mare  Magnum,  excerpts  from  many  authors. 

Both  Muurling  and  Ullmann  present  extended  discus- 
sions of  the  lost  and  extant  works  of  Wessel  with  a  list  of 
the  editions  in  which  the  latter  still  appear. 


CHAPTER  VII 

HIS    PERSONALITY 

Difficult  as  it  is  to  trace  the  events  of  a  life  lived  so 
many  centuries  ago  and  under  circumstances  which  ren- 
dered its  contemporary  record  meager  and  fragmentary, 
it  is  even  more  difficult  to  reintegrate  the  subtle  elements 
that  constitute  personality.  When  we  seek  to  ascertain 
what  manner  of  man  Wessel  Gansfort  was  we  have  to 
depend  mainly  upon  five  sources  of  information.  From 
his  portraits  we  may  judge  of  his  appearance.  The 
external  events  of  his  life,  so  far  as  they  were  the  results  of 
his  own  planning,  constitute  a  partial  revelation  of  the 
man.  His  writings  and  recorded  sayings  afford,  perhaps,  a 
clearer  expression  of  his  nature.  More  revealing  still  are 
the  reactions  which  his  personality  occasioned  in  his  con- 
temporaries, the  estimates  of  his  friends  and  his  enemies. 
And  most  significant  of  all  is  the  record  of  his  impress 
upon  those  with  whom  he  had  no  direct  relations,  the 
proof  of  his  power  to  transmit  his  influence  through  other 
lives. 

Portrait  painting  was  already  well  developed  in  the 
Netherlands  in  the  fifteenth  century.  Portraits  in  oil 
exist  of  Thomas  a  Kempis,  Rudolph  Agricola,  and  several 
other  Dutch  contemporaries  of  Wessel.  It  would  seem 
altogether  probable  that  the  pictures  of  Wessel,  preserved 
in  engravings,  are  all  derived  from  a  single  original, 
painted  from  life.  Their  differences  are  not  too  great 
to  be  explained  by  the  liberty  that  the  engravers  may  have 

VOL  I.— 8  113 


114  Wessel  Gansfort 

taken  with  their  subject.  The  best  executed  of  these, 
which  appears  as  the  frontispiece,  shows  a  distinctly 
individual  face  and  figure.  It  presents  a  beardless  man 
of  later  middle  life,  attired  in  a  way  to  suggest  the  citizen 
quite  as  much  as  the  scholar.  The  plain  coat  and  curious 
cloth  cap  appear  in  the  portrait  of  Thomas  a  Kempis, 
and  even  more  strikingly  resemble  those  shown  in  the 
"Portrait  of  a  man,"  a  small  but  masterly  painting 
belonging  to  the  Altman  Collection,  executed  by  Dirk 
Boul,  a  contemporary  of  Wessel.  The  picture  of  Wessel 
shows  a  Germanic  ruggedness  of  feature  and  an  expression 
unmistakably  noble  and  intellectual.  "There  is  serious- 
ness in  the  brow,  intelligence  in  the  eye,  and  a  degree  of 
roguery  about  the  mouth."  It  is  an  interesting  face, 
rendered  attractive,  in  spite  of  its  plainness,  by  a  certain 
frankness  and  alertness  of  expression. 

Besides  having  health  that  was  never  robust,  Wessel 
labored  under  two  serious  physical  limitations.  His 
vision  was  defective — he  was  apparently  near-sighted — 
and  one  of  his  ankle  bones  was  somewhat  deformed  so  that 
he  walked  with  a  slight  limp.  But  his  imperfect  sight 
did  not  prevent  him  from  leading  the  life  of  a  student,  and 
when  he  was  an  old  man  he  was  still  able  to  write  long 
letters  in  characters  so  small  that  younger  eyes  could 
scarcely  read  them.  There  is  no  indication  that  he 
permitted  his  delicate  health  or  other  physical  handicaps 
to  interfere  with  the  carrying  out  of  his  purposes;  they 
were  simply  obstacles  to  be  overcome.  Early  left  an 
orphan,  he  made  his  way  through  the  schools  helped  by 
friends  who  saw  his  promise;  but  after  he  reached  Paris 
there  is  no  indication  that  he  received  assistance  from 
anyone.  He  appears  to  have  supplied  his  simple  wants 
by  private  teaching  and  the  practice  of  medicine,  and  to 
have  lived  in  cheerful  independence  of  the  patronage  of 
the   rich.     In    this   respect    he    contrasts    sharply    with 


His  Personality  115 

Erasmus,  who  was  constantly  bemoaning  his  poor  health 
and  complaining  of  the  bad  accommodations  of  his 
lodging-places  and  the  niggardliness  of  his  patrons. 

Often  the  possession  of  some  slight  physical  defect 
renders  a  person  misanthropic  or  at  least  non-social; 
but  this  was  not  the  case  with  Wessel.  From  his  youth  he 
manifested  a  rare  faculty  for  making  friends  and  an 
unusual  gift  of  leadership.  There  must  have  been  some- 
thing peculiarly  winsome  in  the  orphan  lad  that  Mistress 
Clantes  chose  to  educate  along  with  her  son,  that  Thomas 
a  Kempis  honored  with  his  special  friendship,  that  the 
Brethren  at  ZwoUe  entrusted  with  the  position  of  teacher, 
and  the  mature  John  of  Cologne  selected  as  his  bosom 
companion.  Genius  sometimes  isolates  its  possessors  and 
renders  them  self-sufficient  and  impatient  with  the  limita- 
tions of  their  fellows,  but  nothing  is  more  marked  in 
Wessel  than  his  companionability  and  his  friendly  interest 
in  those  about  him,  whether  it  be  his  fellow-students 
in  the  schools  or  his  companions  in  the  cloister.  Yet  he 
did  not  care  to  win  friends  by  any  adjustment  of  his 
convictions  or  compromise  as  to  conduct.  He  did  not 
readily  fall  in  with  the  opinion  of  the  majority  nor  render 
intellectual  submission  to  the  generally  accepted  authori- 
ties. His  mind  was  so  constituted  that  he  naturally 
challenged  many  of  the  positions  held  by  his  companions. 
To  some  this  appeared  to  be  little  else  than  intellectual 
obstinacy.  When  a  mere  student  at  Zwolle  he  ventured 
to  differ  with  Thomas  a  Kempis  on  an  important  matter, 
and  to  deliver  himself  of  opinions  so  unusual  that  he  was 
called  upon  to  defend  them  before  the  officers  of  the 
school.  At  Cologne  he  chose  to  neglect  the  lectures  of  the 
university  class-rooms  and  pursue  independent  lines  of 
study  in  the  libraries  of  the  region.  This  disposition  to 
think  his  own  thoughts  and  go  his  own  way  marked 
his  whole  career,  and  may  explain  the  fact  that,  though 


ii6  Wessel  Gansfort 

for  nearly  a  quarter  of  a  century  he  frequented  various 
schools,  except  for  the  two  or  three  years  that  he  held  a 
professorship  at  Heidelberg,  there  is  no  evidence  that  he 
ever  had  official  relations  to  any  of  them.  If  as  Hegel  con- 
tends the  progress  of  thought  proceeds  by  affirmation 
and  denial  and  the  resolution  of  the  resultant  contradic- 
tion, then  Wessel  was  in  at  least  one  important  particular 
temperamentally  suited  to  assist  in  such  progress.  He 
stood  ready  to  challenge,  if  not  deny,  many  of  the  accepted 
doctrines  of  his  day.  That  this  lifelong  trait  gained  him 
one  of  his  titles  is  indicated  by  this  passage  in  a  letter 
from  his  friend,  Jacob  Hoeck,  written  when  they  were 
both  old  men:  "I  can  discern  in  your  letter  only  one 
thing  which  in  my  opinion  is  unbecoming  a  great  man, 
that  is,  you  are  of  an  obstinate  disposition  and  in  all  that 
you  say  aspire  to  a  certain  singularity,  so  that  it  is  gener- 
ally believed  that  you  are  justly  called  'The  Master  of 
Contradiction.'  "  In  the  same  letter  he  refers  to  Wessel's 
"hard  head,"  which  could  not  be  subdued  by  the  blows 
of  ecclesiastical  authority.  Yet  it  would  be  difficult 
wholly  to  establish  this  charge  of  intellectual  perversity, 
for  it  will  be  recalled  that  although  he  went  to  Paris  as 
an  avowed  champion  of  Realism  he  was  led  soon  after 
twice  to  change  his  philosophic  creed;  and  as  his  last 
letters  show,  he  kept  an  open  mind  to  the  very  end, 
courted  discussion,  and  affirmed  that  he  was  awaiting 
further  light  upon  subjects  to  which  he  had  given  lifelong 
study. 

Yet  doubtless  it  was  his  independence  of  mind  that 
made  him  the  inspiring  teacher  that  he  was.  He  pre- 
sented hackneyed  subjects  in  an  original  and  thought- 
provoking  fashion.  The  boldness  of  his  assertions,  the 
startling  character  of  his  paradoxes  arrested  the  attention 
and  stimulated  the  minds  of  his  hearers.  In  this  respect, 
as  in  several  other  particulars,  he  provokes  comparison 


His  Personality  117 

with  Abelard.  And  besides  independence  and  originality 
of  mind,  he  possessed  another  gift  equally  essential  to 
the  teacher:  clearness  of  statement  and  lucidity  of  ex- 
planation. He  had  so  disciplined  himself  through  the 
study  of  logic  and  the  discussions  of  the  class-room  that 
the  advance  of  his  thought,  though  sometimes  unduly 
delayed  by  his  concern  to  make  every  step  perfectly  plain, 
is  quite  irresistible.  It  is  not  difficult  to  explain  his 
triumphs  in  the  arenas  of  academic  debate.  He  pos- 
sessed also  a  very  winning  manner  in  private  and  public 
discourse.  There  was  a  certain  fascination  about  him 
so  that  he  held  his  auditors'  attention  without  apparent 
effort.  It  was  said  by  one  of  his  pupils  at  Adwerd  that 
"the  time  always  passed  rapidly  when  Wessel  was  speak- 
ing, a  whole  day  seemed  but  a  little  hour."  It  must 
not  be  supposed  that  he  depended  wholly  upon  the  force 
of  his  logic  to  make  his  point  or  clinch  his  argument. 
In  early  life  he  was  much  disposed  to  reinforce  his  syl- 
logisms with  a  most  caustic  sarcasm,  and  this  disposi- 
tion he  never  wholly  overcame,  as  passages  in  some  of  his 
last  letters  indicate.  Yet  his  manner  mellowed  with 
time  and  a  genial  humor  came  to  pervade  even  his  most 
serious  discourse.  This  characteristic  is  thus  alluded  to 
in  the  elegy  of  his  admiring  friend,  Paul  Pelantin : 

•'  The  grave  and  gay  in  his  discourse  combined; 
Sober  his  brow,  though  smiles  lurked  round  his  lips." 

That  Wessel  should  have  succeeded  in  interesting  the 
students  of  his  day  in  the  discussion  of  theological  prob- 
lems was  to  be  expected,  for  theology  still  engrossed  the 
intellectual  interest  of  the  schools,  and  all  other  disciplines 
were  regarded  as  preparatory  thereto;  but  that  he  should 
have  been  able  to  inspire  young  men,  and  even  monks, 
to  an  enthusiastic  study  of  the  neglected  Greek  and  the 


ii8  Wessel  Gansfort 

despised  Hebrew  must  be  regarded  as  in  the  nature  of  a 
pedagogical  triumph.  It  was  not  because  he  had  held 
chairs  of  instruction  in  the  universities  but  because  he 
possessed  in  a  superlative  degree  the  power  to  awaken 
and  sustain  the  desire  for  information  and  the  love  of 
truth  that  he  was  always  addressed  as  "Master."  His 
friend,  David  of  Burgundy,  expressed  current  opinion 
concerning  him  when  he  wrote:  "I  have  long  known 
your  brilliant  gifts  as  a  teacher." 

Wessel's  mental  bent  is  clearly  shown  in  the  career  that 
he  chose  and  the  subjects  to  which  he  consistently  de- 
voted himself.  While  not  without  a  proper  desire  to 
contribute  what  he  might  toward  the  bringing  in  of  the 
better  day  that  he  believed  was  about  to  dawn  on  Church 
and  School,  he  was  singularly  free  from  worldly  ambition.' 
There  were  prizes  to  be  won  in  the  monastic  life,  but  he 
declined  to  become  a  monk.  Ordination  to  the  priesthood 
afforded  many  privileges,  secured  many  exemptions,  and 
formed  the  first  round  of  the  ecclesiastical  ladder  at  the 
top  of  which  were  such  coveted  prizes  as  the  cardinal's 
hat  and  the  throne  of  St.  Peter,  but  Wessel  refused  to  take 
the  first  step  toward  the  priesthood.  He  refused,  also, 
the  first  flattering  offer  of  a  professorship  at  Heidelberg,  a 
most  desirable  position  for  a  young  man  just  entering 
upon  an  academic  career.  He  also  apparently  declined 
to  have  any  official  relation  to  the  University  of  Paris, 
where  he  was  a  somewhat  conspicuous  figure  for  nearly 
two  decades.  The  story  of  his  choosing  copies  of  the 
Bible  in  the  original  languages,  when  his  friend  Pope 
Sixtus  IV  offered  him  any  position  of  honor  or  emolument 
within  his  gift,  is  thoroughly  characteristic  of  Wessel's 
disregard  for  the  prizes  that  excite  the  desire  of  the 
average  man.  He  early  chose  and  consistently  followed 
the  career  of  a  scholar,  a  seeker  after  truth  in  the  fields 
of  philosophy  and  religion.     He  was  eager  also  to  teach 


His  Personality  119 

what  he  had  learned,  provided  always  that  he  might  be 
as  free  to  teach  as  he  had  been  to  learn. 

It  is  easy  to  exaggerate  the  accomplishments  of  a  man 
of  Wessel's  period,  for  the  field  of  scholarship  was  still 
comparatively  narrow.  That  he  should  have  been  given 
the  title,  "Lux  Mundi, "  by  his  admiring  pupils,  or  that 
his  contemporaries  should  have  described  his  learning  as 
encyclopedic,  is  not  necessarily  very  significant.  Much 
was  made  of  the  fact  that  he  was  master  of  the  three 
ancient  languages,  Latin,  Greek,  and  Hebrew;  but  a 
hundred  years  later  this  would  have  been  regarded  as  a 
very  ordinary  linguistic  accomplishment.  Wessel  was 
undoubtedly  a  man  of  large  and  varied  information,  but 
the  limitations  of  his  learning,  judged  by  modern  stand- 
ards, are  very  marked.  It  is  conceded  that  as  a  philologist 
he  was  excelled  by  both  his  pupils,  Reuchlin  and  Agricola; 
for  his  only  interest  in  the  Greek  and  Hebrew  languages 
lay  in  the  fact  that  they  brought  him  into  immediate  con- 
tact with  the  thought  of  the  Greek  sages  and  the  biblical 
writers.  The  assurance  that  he  thus  gained  he  expressed 
in  a  reply  to  one  who  had  quoted  the  opinion  of  Thomas 
Aquinas  on  some  teaching  of  Aristotle.  He  dissented  from 
Aquinas'  interpretation,  saying  that  Thomas  had  scarcely 
seen  the  shadow  of  Aristotle  while  he  had  communed 
with  him  in  his  native  tongue.  Wessel's  Latin  style  is 
free  from  medieval  barbarisms,  as  might  be  expected 
from  one  who  was  a  Humanist ;  but  as  Luther  implies  in 
his  letter  recommending  the  Farrago,  it  is  quite  devoid  of 
classic  polish. 

In  the  funeral  ode  of  Paul  Pelantin  much  is  made  of 
Wessel's  extensive  travels,  but  unless  we  accept  as  true 
the  poorly  authenticated  stories  of  his  visits  to  Greece 
and  Egypt,  there  is  nothing  in  his  academic  wanderings 
to  distinguish  him  from  many  another  scholar  of  his 
day.     We  may  also  neglect  the  statements  made  con- 


120  Wessel  Gansfort 

cerning  his  unusual  musical  accomplishments.  But  that 
he  had  exceptional  skill  in  the  practice  of  medicine  is 
beyond  reasonable  doubt.  His  contemporaries  give  em- 
phatic and  detailed  testimony  in  the  matter.  In  the 
ode  with  which  he  was  welcomed  on  his  return  to  Gronin- 
gen  he  is  called  Galen  and  is  represented  as  bringing  the 
gift  of  health  to  his  Fatherland.  And  in  the  funeral  ode, 
Paul  Pelantin,  himself  a  physician,  makes  extended  refer- 
ence to  his  exceptional  medical  skill,  and  alludes  to  his 
patient  efforts  to  enlarge  the  boundaries  of  medical 
knowledge  by  conducting  thousands  of  experiments.  In 
a  passage  beginning : 

"  The  healing  art  to  him  Apollo  gave, 
Hope  he  awoke  and  precious  health  restored," 

he  celebrates  his  ability  to  excite  expectation  of  recovery 
in  his  patients  and  his  bold  experiments  in  the  practice  of 
his  art.  He  relates  one  such — "one  of  a  thousand" — 
in  which  an  aged  man,  nearly  dead  and  given  up  to  die 
by  other  physicians,  had  been  restored  to  life  and  health 
by  enclosing  him  in  the  warm  carcass  of  an  ox  killed  for 
that  purpose.  Such  a  crude  experiment  probably  excited 
more  wonder  at  that  time  than  do  our  modern  mechanical 
devices  for  resuscitation  such  as  the  transfusion  of  blood 
or  the  injection  of  a  saline  solution  into  the  circulation. 
Anything  that  postpones  impending  death  naturally 
excites  popular  wonder.  A  more  practical  proof  of  his 
unusual  medical  skill  is  to  be  found  in  the  fact  that  men 
of  such  prominence  as  David  of  Burgundy  and  Pope 
Sixtus  IV  should  have  sought  his  services.  As  has  been 
already  noticed,  it  was  apparently  by  the  practice  of 
medicine  as  well  as  by  private  teaching  that  he  supported 
himself  in  Paris  and  during  his  academic  wanderings. 
By  this  means  also  he  no  doubt  rewarded  the  hospitality 


His  Personality  121 

of  the  nuns  of  Saint  Clara  and  the  monks  at  Adwerd  and 
Mount  Saint  Agnes.  Still  in  existence  in  Hardenberg's 
time  were  his  treatises  upon  practical  medicine,  recording 
the  results  of  his  experiments  with  dangerous  diseases. 
The  destruction  of  these  books  is  to  be  regretted,  not 
because  it  involves  any  loss  to  medical  practice,  but 
because  it  deprives  those  who  are  writing  the  history  of 
medicine  of  data  gathered  through  the  experiments  of  a 
distinguished  medieval  physician  who  was  also  a  philo- 
sopher and  a  theologian. 

It  is  not  improbable  that  Wessel's  widely  recognized 
skill  as  a  physician  may  have  heightened  his  fame  in  other 
lines  of  achievement.  Medicine  and  magic  were  closely 
related  in  the  medieval  mind,  as  they  are  to  a  considerable 
degree  in  the  modern.  The  man  whose  treatment  appeared 
to  cure  their  sickness,  or  whose  unintelligible  technical 
jargon  seemed  to  explain  their  death,  was  regarded  by  the 
common  people  with  something  akin  to  awe.  Even  in 
the  next  century  Paracelsus  was  able  to  prey  upon  popular 
superstition  regarding  the  physician's  art  and  persuade 
many  that  he  was  assisted  by  supernatural  agencies.  It 
is  not  without  significance  that  while  the  title.  Doctor, 
the  man  who  has  learned  and  hence  is  able  to  teach,  has 
always  in  academic  circles  its  proper  qualification  of  Law 
or  Medicine  or  Letters  as  the  case  may  be,  in  popular 
usage,  the  word  Doctor  connotes  the  physician.  The  man 
who  cures  or  at  least  attempts  to  cure  their  bodily  ills 
is  still  to  most  people  the  Doctor,  par  excellence,  the 
learned  man! 

While  Wessel  must  be  thought  of  as  a  Humanist,  one 
interested  in  the  life  and  literature  of  the  classic  age,  yet 
he  is  first  and  always  a  Christian  Humanist.  His  acquaint- 
ance with  the  ancient  languages  and  sages  was  acquired 
as  a  means  to  his  completer  understanding  of  the  early 
Christian  literature  and  the  philosophical  systems  with 


122  Wessel  Gansfort 

which  Christian  theology  early  formed  an  alliance.  He 
did  not  study  the  ancient  languages  for  their  own  sake, 
but  for  the  light  they  cast  upon  the  mystery  of  life,  or  the 
contribution  they  might  make  to  theological  truth.  This 
fact  is  hinted  in  a  letter  written  to  him  by  Alexander 
Hegius,  one  of  his  pupils,  who  says:  "As  to  my  studies, 
I  am  following  your  advice,  for  any  literature  whose 
study  involves  the  loss  of  one's  rectitude  is  pernicious." 
Wessel 's  pages  are  strewn  with  citations  from  or  allusions 
to  Greek  and  Latin  authors,  secular  and  religious.  Un- 
questionably, he  was  widely  read  in  such  classic  and 
patristic  writings  as  were  accessible  to  the  scholars  of  his 
day.  He  had  visited  many  libraries,  and  in  his  later 
days  some  of  his  students  were  interested  to  bring  to  his 
attention  any  rare  books  that  they  might  discover. 

As  a  Humanist  with  strong  mystical  tendencies,  Wessel 
was  naturally  disposed  to  disparage  the  method  and 
matter  of  the  scholastic  writers.  More  or  less  acquaint- 
ance with  them  was  the  common  possession  of  the  the- 
ologians of  his  day,  but  he  found  in  them  little  to  admire. 
"Theological  wranglers"  he  contemptuously  called  some 
of  them.  The  greatest  of  them,  such  as  Thomas  Aquinas, 
he  frequently  quotes,  but  often  to  disapprove.  Yet 
he  was  not  lacking  in  appreciation  of  the  value  of  the 
logical  method  of  the  scholastics  as  a  discipline  in  sharp- 
ness of  definition  and  exactness  of  statement.  In  a  letter 
to  Ludolph  van  Veen  he  laments  that  their  common 
friend,  John  of  Wesel,  then  being  tried  for  heresy,  had  not 
received  a  thorough  training  in  the  scholastic  method, 
which  he  believed  would  have  saved  him  from  many  of  his 
difhculties. 

While,  as  has  been  said,  the  writings  of  Wessel  give 
evidence  of  his  wide  reading  in  the  Schoolmen  and  the 
Fathers  and  to  a  less  degree  in  the  Greek  and  Latin 
classics,  yet  it  was  not  with  these  but  with  the  Scriptures 


His  Personality  123 

that  his  mind  was  saturated.  The  words  and  phrases  of 
the  Vulgate  often  form  the  matrix  in  which  his  own 
thought  is  cast.  It  is  from  the  Scriptures  that  most  of 
his  citations  are  made.  Not  infrequently  there  are  as  many 
as  a  half-dozen  upon  a  single  page.  Those  from  the  New 
Testament  naturally  predominate:  among  those  from  the 
Old  Testament,  passages  from  the  Psalms,  interpreted  in  a 
Christian  sense,  are  the  most  frequent.  Muurling  has 
thus  grouped  the  writers  from  whom  Wessel  quotes  most 
largely:  among  ancient  secular  writers,  Plato,  Aristotle, 
Alexander,  Proclus,  Homer,  Demosthenes,  Cicero,  Vergil, 
Gellius,  Valerius;  among  the  Church  Fathers,  Origen, 
Gregory  Nazianzen,  Athanasius,  Chrysostom,  Jerome, 
and  Augustine;  among  later  writers,  Thomas  Aquinas, 
Scotus,  Bernard  of  Clairvaux,  Peter  d'Ailly,  and  Gerson. 
"Many  other  names  occur  again  and  again"  he  adds, 
caUing  attention  also  to  Wessel' s  acquaintance  with  the 
Talmud  and  the  Koran.  Raymond  Lull  is  among  the 
many  almost  forgotten  writers  from  whom  he  quotes. 
He  evidently  was  familiar  with  his  philosophical  writings, 
and  it  would  appear  that  his  oft-quoted  aphorism,  "To 
love  is  to  live,"  had  been  borrowed  from  this  first  martyr 
missionary  to  the  Moslems. 

Though  the  scientific  spirit  was  beginning  to  assert  itself, 
the  age  in  which  Wessel  lived  abounded  in  superstitions 
of  many  sorts,  the  offspring  of  earlier  ignorance.  Thomas 
Aquinas  had  given  a  qualified  approval  of  astrology,  and 
most  of  the  popes  consulted  astrologers  before  beginning 
any  important  undertaking.  Savonarola  declared  in  a 
sermon,  "There  is  no  prelate  or  great  lord  that  hath  not 
intimate  dealings  with  some  astrologer  who  fixeth  the 
hour  at  which  he  is  to  ride  out  or  undertake  some  piece  of 
business."  Even  Peter  d'Ailly,  Chancellor  of  the  Uni- 
versity of  Paris  and  a  man  of  the  most  liberal  culture, 
could  not  wholly  free  himself  from  this  form  of  supersti- 


124  Wessel  Gansfort 

tion;  and  Luther,  who  belongs  to  the  next  century,  may 
be  said  to  have  accepted  most  of  the  superstitions  of  his 
day  and  beUeved  in  witchcraft  and  magic  and  astrology 
and  in  demonic  agency  in  storms  and  pestilence.  It  is 
therefore  an  evidence  of  the  unusual  strength  and  in- 
dependence of  Wessel's  mind  that  he  should  have  risen 
above  the  common  superstitions  of  his  day.  Astrology 
apparently  has  no  place  whatever  in  his  thought,  and  as 
for  belief  in  ghosts  and  visions  and  phenomena  of  that 
sort,  which  were  generally  accepted  as  part  and  parcel  of 
the  Christian  faith,  he  discourages  it  as  disproven  by 
Pythagoras,  as  contrary  to  the  Scriptures,  and  as  subver- 
sive of  the  best  Christian  living.  To  the  nun,  Gertrude 
Reyniers,  who  had  questioned  him  concerning  some  current 
stories  of  ghosts,  he  wrote:  "If  most  of  these  tales  of 
revelations  and  visions  are  not  tempered  with  a  large 
grain  of  salt,  I  regard  them  as  both  illusory  and  danger- 
ous." He  saw  the  peril  in  obscuring  the  outlines  of  the 
great  truths  of  Christianity  by  involving  them  in  a  cloud 
of  superstition  or  of  identifying  the  Christian  faith  with 
an  unbiblical  and  irrational  supernaturalism.  He  shrank 
from  the  idea  of  any  influence  of  the  departed  spirits  upon 
us,  or  of  our  influence  upon  them.  For  that  reason  he 
discouraged  masses  and  prayers  for  the  dead,  and  left 
request  that  none  should  be  said  on  his  behalf.  This  is 
representative  of  his  attitude  of  mind;  he  was  naturally 
critical,  and  in  a  noble  sense,  rationalistic.  This  rendered 
him  impatient,  not  only  with  the  superstitions  of  the 
priests  and  the  monks  and  the  literature  of  the  marvelous 
that  nourished  them,  but  even  more  with  the  practices 
upon  the  common  people  made  possible  by  these  super- 
stitions. It  was  his  attack  upon  these  things  that 
excited  the  enmity  of  the  priests  who  made  it  unsafe 
for  him  in  Paris,  and  the  wrath  of  the  Mendicant 
Friars  who  after  his  death  wreaked  upon  his  writings  the 


His  Personality  125 

vengeance  they  were  prevented  from  inflicting  upon  their 
author. 

No  doubt  Wessel's  critical  attitude  gave  him  the  appear- 
ance, especially  in  his  younger  days,  of  being  skeptical 
and  perhaps  conceited.  Obedience  to  authority  in 
matters  of  belief  was  commonly  regarded  as  one  of  the 
foremost  Christian  virtues.  A  man  who  set  question- 
marks  after  the  dicta  of  the  most  venerated  Schoolmen 
and  challenged  some  of  the  time-honored  customs  of  the 
Church  was  certain  to  become  the  object  of  suspicion. 
Unquestionably,  his  disposition  to  dissent  from  the 
statements  of  his  teachers  and  perplex  them  with  para- 
doxes tended  to  make  him  persona  non  grata  in  the 
schools  that  he  attended.  But  whatever  intellectual 
pride  may  have  disfigured  his  youth,  his  later  years  were 
marked  by  a  noble  humility  of  spirit.  Shortly  before 
his  death  he  wrote  to  his  friend,  Jacob  Hoeck:  "I 
acknowledge  that  in  some  of  the  assertions  that  I  make  I 
am  looked  upon  as  singular.  I  often  suspect  myself  of 
singularity,  and  therefore  fear  that  I  frequently  fall  into 
error.  If  you  could  look  into  my  heart  you  would  see 
there,  I  am  sure,  not  pride  but  humility  and  contrition, 
since  I  often  pray  that  I  may  not,  as  the  penalty  of  my 
stubbornness,  fall  into  damnable  error.  I  am  always 
willing  to  be  set  right,  not  only  by  men  of  learning  and 
experience  like  yourself,  but  by  anyone  however  humble." 
Certainly,  the  impression  made  by  Wessel's  writings  is^ 
not  that  of  the  arrogance  of  dogmatic  certainty  which 
regards  the  evidence  as  all  in  and  the  case  closed,  but 
rather  that  of  open-mindedness  and  patient  search  for  the 
truth. 

This  intellectual  modesty  finds  its  counterpart  in 
Wessel's  religious  humility.  Although  he  had  lived,  so 
far  as  is  known,  a  blameless  life  of  unselfish  service,  and 
was  regarded  by  those  who  knew  him  intimately  in  his 


A 


126  Wessel  Gansfort 

later  years  as  a  man  of  saintly  character,  yet  in  the 
spirit  of  Saint  Paul  he  utterly  disclaimed  any  unusual 
spiritual  attainment.  He  did  not  conceive  of  Chris- 
tianity as  a  legal  system  whose  requirements  he  could 
fully  meet  or  exceed.  There  was  no  room  in  his  thought 
for  works  of  supererogation.  To  him  our  Lord's  injunc- 
tion, "Be  ye  perfect,  even  as  your  Father  in  heaven  is 
perfect,"  made  all  religious  self-complacency  impossible. 
In  one  of  his  devotional  writings  he  says:  "Jesus  desires 
to  see  in  man  the  divine  image  in  truth  and  purity  and 
love  restored  by  himself.  In  so  far  as  these  do  not  lie 
within  us,  darkness  dwells  in  our  hearts."  With  such  an 
ideal  before  him  he  could  say  of  the  graces  of  the  Christian 
life  as  he  said  of  the  attainments  of  the  scholar:  "I  grow 
old,  but  I  remain  always  a  learner."  He  was  accustomed 
to  remark  that  "the  man  who  as  the  result  of  the  reading 
of  the  Bible  does  not  come  to  think  less  and  less  of  his 
moral  attainments,  not  only  reads  in  vain,  but  reads  to 
his  peril." 

The  Church's  mediation  of  divine  grace,  a  cardinal 
doctrine  of  his  age,  had  very  little  place  in  Wessel 's 
thought.  He  conceived  of  the  Christian's  relations  to 
God  in  the  personal  terms  in  which  they  are  presented  in 
the  New  Testament,  and  constantly  refers  to  our  Lord's 
dealings  with  his  disciples  and  others  as  illustrating  his 
relations  to  us.  This  was  doubtless  due  to  his  early 
training  in  the  schools  of  the  Brethren,  his  natural  tend- 
ency to  mysticism,  and  his  lifelong  study  of  the  Scriptures. 
His  constant  emphasis  upon  love  to  God  as  the  one 
essential  thing  in  the  Christian  life  has  led  some  to  char- 
acterize his  religious  temper  as  distinctly  Johannine,  in  an 
age  in  which  legalism  was  the  dominant  religious  spirit. 
He  says  repeatedly  that  "love  is  life,"  and  that  the  perfec- 
tion of  our  love  of  God  will  constitute  the  bliss  of  heaven. 
"Only  in  love  is  life,  and  only  in  a  holy  love  is  a  holy  life. 


His  Personality  127 

We  must  love  our  Elder  Brother  and  be  brought  back 
by  him  to  the  Father  of  Love."  It  is  interesting  to  notice 
that  in  thus  emphasizing  love  to  God  as  the  essential  thing 
in  religion,  he  involves  love  to  our  neighbor.  He  affirms 
that  we  cannot  love  Christ  except  as  we  love  those  whom 
he  loves. 

The  breadth  of  Wessel's  religious  sympathy  is  one  of 
the  striking  things  in  his  character.  This  appears  most 
clearly  in  his  treatise  on  the  Communion  of  the  Saints. 
He  counts  as  fellow-members  of  the  household  of  faith 
not  only  the  adherents  of  all  branches  of  the  Church,  but 
those  who  though  they  might  belong  to  no  Church  were 
in  harmony  with  the  spirit  of  Christ.  He  adopts  the 
Psalmist's  statement:  "I  am  a  companion  of  all  them 
that  fear  thee,  and  of  them  that  keep  thy  precepts."  It 
is  a  man's  attitude  toward  God,  not  his  relation  to  some 
religious  institution,  that  for  him  constitutes  the  basis  of 
religious  fellowship.  And  inasmuch  as  this  attitude 
may  be  changed  by  the  influences  of  the  future  life,  Wessel 
regarded  with  sympathetic  hopefulness  the  prospect  of 
those  who  in  this  life  had  not  been  brought  into  re- 
conciliation with  God.  He  had  pondered  much  upon  the 
future,  and  had  practiced,  as  we  would  express  it,  the  life 
eternal.  His  anticipation  of  it  is  sometimes  expressed 
in  words  that  suggest  the  ardors  of  Bernard  of  Cluny. 
Death  is  the  transit  from  the  present  dim  lamplight  into 
the  brightening  dawn  of  God's  presence.  It  returns  the 
exile  to  his  own  country.  It  ushers  the  bride  into  the 
marriage  chamber.  The  bliss  of  the  heavenly  life  will 
consist,  he  believed,  in  the  full  possession  of  the  truth, 
in  union  with  God  through  purified  love,  and  in  increasing 
moral  assimilation  to  the  divine  likeness.  He  had  become 
eager  to  make  the  great  venture,  and  his  last  words  of 
humble  reliance  upon  Christ  express  the  faith  in  which  he 
greeted  the  unseen. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

WESSEL  AS  A   PROTESTANT 

There  is  a  certain  anomaly  involved,  in  applying  the 
word  Protestant  to  a  man  who  belongs  to  the  century 
before  the  Reformation,  and  who  lived  and  died  in  full 
fellowship  with  the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  Yet  protest 
and  reform  have  been  constantly  recurring  phenomena 
in  the  Church's  life.  It  would  not  be  difficult  to  form  a 
list  of  her  leaders  reaching  from  the  Apostolic  age  to  our 
own  to  whom  the  term  Protestant  might  properly  be 
applied.  They  were  men  who  dissented  from  things  as 
they  were,  pointed  out  the  better  way,  and  became  at 
once  the  disturbers  and  the  benefactors  of  the  Church. 
Among  Protestants,  in  this  more  general  sense,  Wessel 
unquestionably  deserves  a  place. 

But  should  we  apply  to  him  the  term  Protestant  in  its 
restricted  and  partisan  sense?  Facts  like  the  following 
would  seem  quite  conclusive.  Wessel  assailed  the  abuses 
in  Church  administration  against  which  the  Reform- 
ers aimed  their  attacks.  He  stressed  doctrines  which 
they  restored  to  their  original  prominence.  He  put  the 
same  emphasis  that  they  did  upon  the  Scriptures,  as  the 
supreme  authority  in  faith  and  conduct.  His  conception 
of  the  Church  and  of  the  relation  of  the  individual  to 
Christ  reveals  a  type  of  thought  and  experience  common 
to  the  Reformers.  In  his  view  of  the  sacraments  he 
anticipated  that  of  the  most  radical  of  the  Reformers. 

Hence  it  was  to  be  expected  that  the  Reformers  would 

128 


The  Church  of  St.  Martin,  Groningen,  in  which  the  Bones  of  Wessel  Gansfort 

now  Rest 


Wessel  as  a  Protestant  129 

claim  Wessel  as  a  kindred  spirit.  Luther,  who  did  not 
make  the  acquaintance  of  Wessel' s  writings  till  about 
1520,  (when  he  had  already  taken  his  characteristic  posi- 
tions,) said  that  if  he  had  made  their  acquaintance  earlier, 
his  enemies  might  have  accused  him  of  having  taken  most 
of  his  ideas  from  them.  That  other  German  and  Swiss 
and  Dutch  Reformers  were  strongly  influenced  by  Wessel 
in  the  formation  of  their  theological  views  and  claimed 
him  as  their  spiritual  father  we  have  abundant  evidence. 
Even  Erasmus  affirmed  that  Wessel  had  taught  all  that 
Luther  was  teaching,  only  in  a  much  less  violent  and  offen- 
sive manner.  That  the  Reformers  should  thus  have 
claimed  discipleship  to  Wessel  and  concerned  themselves 
in  the  publication  of  his  writings  is  quite  decisive.  It 
may  be  safely  assumed  that  they  could  be  trusted  to 
distinguish  a  friend  from  a  foe. 

It  is  significant  that  the  Reformers'  view  of  Wessel  was 
confirmed  by  contemporary  Roman  Catholic  opinion. 
He  was  regarded  by  many  of  the  theologians  of  his  day 
as  "heretical,"  in  the  same  sense  in  which  that  term 
was  later  applied  to  the  Protestant  leaders.  His  views 
rendered  it  unsafe  for  him  to  remain  in  Paris,  and  made 
the  members  of  the  theological  faculty  at  Heidelberg 
unwilling  to  accept  him  as  a  colleague.  The  Inquisitors 
at  Cologne,  who  had  reduced  his  friend  John  of  Wesel  to 
submission,  were  planning  to  attack  him  when  he  escaped 
to  the  diocese  of  his  friend,  the  powerful  Bishop  of  Utrecht. 
After  his  death,  the  same  hostility  was  directed  toward 
his  writings.  The  Mendicant  Friars,  the  champions  of 
conservatism  in  theology,  endeavored  to  burn  them  all. 
Those  that  survived  were  apparently  circulated  with  great 
caution.  Luther  complains  of  the  ill  fortune  which  had 
prevented  Wessel's  writings  from  having  had  a  wider 
reading.  And  even  after  his  Farrago  had  been  given 
publicity  through  the  press,  there  were  hostile  agencies 

VOL.   I — 9 


130  Wessel  Gansfort 

at  work  to  hinder  its  circulation.  Quite  different,  how- 
ever, from  the  attempted  destruction  of  his  writings  by 
fanatical  monks  and  the  unofficial  obstruction  of  their 
circulation  was  their  formal  and  official  condemnation 
in  1529  by  being  placed  on  the  Index  of  Prohibited  Books 
and  the  later  decision  of  the  Fathers  of  the  Council  of 
Trent  that  they  deserved  to  rank  in  the  first  class  of 
books  thus  condemned. 

It  is  perhaps  not  strange  that  Roman  Catholic  writers 
are,  in  the  main,  reluctant  to  admit  that  a  man  of  such 
distinction  as  Wessel,  an  intimate  friend  of  the  pope  and 
others  high  in  ecclesiastical  position,  was  a  spiritual 
ancestor  of  the  Reformers  and  an  advocate  of  the 
doctrines  and  policies  that  the  Church  condemned  at 
Trent  and  still  condemns.  The  contrary  conclusions 
reached  by  modem  Catholic  and  Protestant  scholars  as 
to  the  proper  classification  of  Wessel  indicate  how  much 
more  influential  partisan  prejudice  is  than  the  much 
vaunted  "scientific  method"  claimed  by  both  parties. 
It  is  somewhat  disconcerting  to  compare  the  article  on 
Wessel  in  the  Catholic  Encyclopedia  with  that  in  the  New 
Schaff-Herzog,  or  the  conclusions  of  Denifle  with  those  of 
Hamack.  However,  the  more  modern  Catholic  writers 
are  disposed  to  make  important  concessions  to  their 
Protestant  opponents,  and  it  seems  probable  that  Wessel's 
spiritual  affiliation  with  the  Reformers  will  ultimately 
be  recognized  by  all  parties. 

The  two  great  doctrines  from  which  the  Reformation 
derived  its  distinctly  religious  character  were  justification 
by  faith  and  the  supreme  authority  of  the  Scriptures. 
They  have  been  described  as  "the  material  and  formal 
principles"  of  the  Reformation.  They  naturally  form 
the  touchstone  for  the  determination  of  a  man's  relation 
to  Protestantism.  As  to  Wessel's  position  regarding 
the  first  of  these  principles  there  can  be  no  doubt.      He 


Wessel  as  a  Protestant  131 

affirms  it  repeatedly  in  Pauline  terms.  And  not  only 
does  he  state  unequivocally  that  it  is  faith  and  faith 
alone  that  restores  a  man  to  reconciliation  with  God, 
but  he  dismisses  or  neglects  all  the  devices  by  which  the 
medieval  theologians  had  induced  the  penitent  to  pur- 
chase the  mediation  of  the  Church.  A  characteristic 
example  of  the  way  in  which  he  states  the  doctrine  of 
justification  by  faith,  both  negatively  and  positively,  is 
afforded  in  chapters  45  and  47  of  the  treatise  on  the 
Magnitude  of  the  Sufferings  of  Christ,  in  which  he  says : 
"Whoever  believes  that  he  shall  be  justified  by  his  own 
works  does  not  know  what  righteousness  is.  For  to  be 
righteous  is  to  give  to  everyone  his  due,  but  who  has 
ever  been  able  to  render  his  full  duty  to  God  or  indeed 
to  man  ?  A  person  who  imagines  that  he  has,  possesses  no 
conception  of  the  magnitude  of  the  blessedness  of  the 
future,  to  which  no  works  of  his  can  ever  entitle  him." 
A  representative  positive  statement  of  the  doctrine  is 
the  following:  "To  everyone  who  believes,  Christ  is  the 
end  and  fruit  of  the  law  for  righteousness,  because  it  is 
he  that  gives  to  all  that  believe  in  his  name  the  power  to 
become  sons  of  God.  By  faith  in  the  Word  they  connect 
themselves  with  the  Word.  The  Word  is  God  with  whom 
faith  thus  connects  them.  But  it  is  good  to  be  thus  con- 
nected with  God,  because  whoever  is  so  connected  becomes 
one  spirit  with  Him,  righteous  with  the  Righteous  One, 
holy  with  the  Holy." 

It  should  be  noticed,  however,  that  by  faith  Wessel 
means  more  than  intellectual  assent;  in  his  conception 
it  involves  love  and  obedience  and  self-commitment. 
With  justification  God  gives  his  Spirit,  thereby  infusing 
in  the  believer  the  beginnings  of  love  and  obedience;  these 
will  grow  as  faith  itself  grows.  "In  unbelievers  their 
lack  of  faith  separates  them  from  life,  but  he  that  believeth 
on  Christ  hath  eternal  life.     Our  good  deeds  nourish 


132  Wessel  Gansfort 

and  strengthen  our  faith,  but  they  do  not  give  life.  They 
merely  strengthen  the  bond  of  life,  that  is,  faith.  Only 
Christ  and  the  Spirit  give  life;  only  Christ's  sacrifice 
sanctifies  us."  This  progress  in  faith  through  obedience 
is  likened  to  the  stages  in  life.  "Faith  is  first  a  child; 
next  when  it  is  equipped  with  hope  and  gains  a  higher 
confidence  it  becomes  a  maiden;  finally  it  is  converted 
into  love,  when  the  believer  disdains  every  other  affection 
save  that  which  is  fixed  upon  the  highest  object." 

With  such  a  conception  of  faith,  as  a  vital  principle 
in  a  man's  life,  the  bond  of  an  increasing  fellowship  with 
God,  it  was  not  difficult  for  Wessel  to  resolve  into  a  mere 
difference  of  standpoint  the  apparent  contradiction  of 
Paul  and  James  as  to  the  relative  value  of  faith  and 
works.  Both  apostles  believe  that  it  is  faith  that  justifies, 
but  James  insists  that  it  must  be  a  genuine  living  faith 
that  manifests  its  life  by  its  deeds.  But  it  is  in  works  and 
not  by  works  that  faith  lives,  just  as  it  is  by  its  deeds  that 
the  body  shows  itself  to  be  alive;  if  these  were  lacking  it 
would  be  regarded  as  dead.  So  the  soul,  if  it  discharge 
none  of  the  functions  of  life,  must  be  regarded  as  dead. 
But  of  all  the  functions  of  the  soul  love  is  the  highest, 
hence  love — even  though  like  that  of  Mary  it  sits  with 
folded  hands — is  the  highest  proof  of  the  existence  of  spir- 
itual life.  "Love  is  preferred  above  all  duty  and  service; 
but  as  love  is  the  offspring  of  faith,  faith  is  acceptable 
not  for  its  own  sake  alone  but  also  for  that  of  its  offspring." 

It  is  at  this  point  that  Wessel  combines  the  central 
teaching  of  John  with  that  of  Paul,  making  of  faith  and 
love  the  two  foci  about  which  all  his  teachings  concerning 
salvation  are  grouped.  In  this  also  we  see  the  combination 
of  the  two  elements  which  are  characteristic  of  the  best 
type  of  Reformation  doctrine.  Here  the  products  of 
Humanism  and  Mysticism  coalesce;  the  former  in  its 
emphasis  on  the  historical  and  objective,  on  what  Christ 


Wessel  as  a  Protestant  133 

wrought  for  us  to  be  apprehended  by  faith;  the  latter 
with  its  necessary  supplement  in  what  Christ  works  in  us, 
evoking  our  love  and  thus  uniting  us  vitally  to  Himself. 
Wessel  sets  forth  the  relation  of  faith  to  love  in  terms 
of  generation.  God's  love  for  us  as  revealed  in  Christ 
begets  our  faith  in  Him.  But  faith  necessarily  includes 
reciprocal  love  and  service.  And  from  the  union  of  God's 
love  to  us  with  the  love  thereby  evoked  in  our  hearts 
proceed  all  the  graces  of  the  Christian  character  and  all 
the  activities  of  the  Christian  life.  The  essence  of  the 
divine  nature  is  love,  and  we  share  the  divine  life  as  we 
exercise  love.  With  a  reiteration  as  constant  as  that  of 
Browning,  Wessel  asserts  that  "love  is  life,"  and  further 
affirms  that  an  increasing  love  to  God  brings  about  a 
species  of  deification  not  unlike  that  which  Irenasus 
taught  was  to  be  the  goal  of  Christian  development. 

But  Wessel's  repeated  declarations  that  faith,  in  this 
sense,  is  the  sole  ground  of  a  man's  justification  are 
strongly  reinforced  by  his  constant  disparagement  of  the 
means  by  which  the  medieval  Church  made  reconciliation 
with  God  seem,  in  large  part,  something  to  be  merited  by 
good  deeds  or  penitential  suffering  or  to  be  obtained 
through  the  good  offices  of  the  pope  or  the  priest.  Be- 
cause in  ministering  God's  grace  to  men  the  Church 
had  partly  obscured  the  fact  that  it  was  grace  and  not 
reward,  Wessel  cut  the  foundation  from  under  the  Church's 
penitential  system,  belittled  the  value  of  confession, 
endowment  of  masses,  repetition  of  prayers,  pilgrimages, 
celibacy,  and  asceticism  in  general.  These  ' '  good  works, " 
which  formed  so  conspicuous  a  part  of  the  life  of  the 
medieval  Church,  had,  he  declared,  nothing  in  them  to 
merit  salvation.  The}'-  were  not  even  the  proper  proofs 
of  faith,  which  were  to  be  found  in  love  to  God  and  to 
our  fellow-men. 

In  his  teaching  concerning  the  authority  of  Scripture 


134  Wessel  Gansfort 

Wessel  states  his  own  personal  experience  rather  than  an 
abstract  theological  principle.  In  the  schools  of  the 
Brethren  he  had  early  learned  to  read  and  love  the  Bible ; 
later,  he  had  given  many  years  to  the  study  of  the  current 
philosophical  and  theological  systems.  He  had  seen  the 
effect  upon  the  Church  of  neglecting  the  Bible  and  accept- 
ing the  dicta  of  councils  and  popes  as  the  final  authority 
in  religion  and  morals.  In  the  meantime  he  had  acquired 
a  knowledge  of  the  original  languages  of  the  Bible  and  of 
the  history  of  the  Church.  He  knew  what  the  Scriptures 
taught  and  wherein  the  Church  had  departed  from  its 
original  faith  and  standards  of  life.  Upon  this  knowledge 
he  based  his  own  faith  and  nourished  his  reHgious  life. 
And  he  had  come  to  the  conviction  that  the  only  path 
for  the  Church's  return  to  her  former  faith  and  piety  was 
that  which  he  had  himself  taken.  The  New  Testament 
must  be  made  the  norm  of  religious  thinking  and  conduct ; 
all  that  was  taught  or  enjoined  contrary  to  it  must  be  re- 
jected. The  medieval  theologians  held  that  the  Scriptures 
were  inspired,  but  that  the  Spirit  of  God  also  directed 
the  councils  of  the  Church  and  spoke  through  her  prelates, 
especially  the  pope.  Their  official  utterances  in  creeds 
and  legislation  and  judicial  decisions  of  various  sorts  came 
to  constitute  the  laws  of  the  Church — presumably  in 
harmony  with  the  Scriptures  and  popularly  believed  to  be 
an  interpretation  of  the  principles  of  the  New  Testament 
suited  to  the  altered  needs  of  the  Church.  Unbiased 
readers  of  the  New  Testament,  however,  could  not  but 
discover  many  points  at  which  the  laws  and  customs  of 
the  Church  were  at  variance  with  the  Gospel  and  the 
usages  of  Apostolic  times;  for  the  legislation  of  the  popes 
was  often  more  influenced  by  the  exigencies  of  the  situa- 
tion than  by  the  principles  laid  down  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment. Yet  after  the  eleventh  century  they  did  not  hesi- 
tate to  claim  divine  authority  for  their  official  utterances. 


Wessel  as  a  Protestant  135 

They  were  the  vicegerents  of  Christ,  and  whoever  ven- 
tured to  disobey  them  did  so  at  the  peril  of  his  soul.  It  is 
true  that  the  Reforming  Councils  of  Wessel's  century, 
which  deposed  and  condemned  popes  and  reannounced 
the  principle  that  an  Ecumenical  Council  was  the  highest 
authority  in  the  Church,  had  somewhat  lessened  papal 
prestige,  but  they  had  not  greatly  increased  the  authority 
of  the  Scriptures. 

Such  were  the  circumstances  under  which  Wessel 
attempted  to  give  to  the  neglected  Bible — discredited 
somewhat  because  of  heretical  movements  based  upon  its 
unskilled  interpretation — the  place  of  supreme  religious 
authority.  The  difficulty  of  the  undertaking  becomes  the 
more  apparent  when  we  recall  that  the  work  of  Erasmus 
and  Reuchlin  had  not  yet  been  done,  the  printing-press 
was  just  coming  into  use,  and  the  united  influence  of  the 
clergy  and  the  monks  was  arrayed  against  this  seemingly 
dangerous  innovation.  Since  the  popes  were  making 
extravagant  claims  for  their  authority,  it  was  perhaps 
inevitable  that  Wessel  should  make  similar  claims  for 
that  of  the  Scriptures.  Absolute  authority  in  a  man 
could  only  be  met  by  absolute  authority  in  a  book.  It  was 
inconsistent  with  his  theory  that  the  Eternal  Word  was 
but  imperfectly  expressed  either  in  Creation  or  in  the 
Scriptures,  but  he  nevertheless  took  the  ground,  which  the 
Protestant  Church  of  the  next  century  felt  compelled  to 
take,  that  the  Bible,  as  a  whole,  is  an  infallible  revelation 
of  God.  Wessel,  however,  recognized  the  great  difference 
between  the  value  of  the  Old  Testament  and  that  of  the 
New,  though,  he  contended  that  both  were  free  from  error 
of  any  kind.  "All  Scripture,"  he  writes  in  one  of  his 
letters,  "is  a  connected  whole,  whose  several  parts  must 
necessarily  be  inspired  by  the  Holy  Spirit  and  true;  for 
the  whole  cannot  be  true  if  even  the  smallest  part  be 
false!"     Thus  early  was  the  argument  for  the  authority 


136  Wessel  Gansfort 

of  the  Bible  constructed  in  the  form  of  an  inverted  pyra- 
mid, whose  unstable  equilibrium  was  to  be  the  occasion  of 
constant  anxiety  to  Protestant  theologians. 

Wessel,  however,  was  not  blind  to  the  value  of  the 
Church's  traditions  as  supplementing  the  New  Testament 
record.  Nor  was  he  indifferent  to  the  testimony  of  the 
Fathers,  or  to  the  decisions  of  councils,  or  to  the  utterances 
of  the  popes.  These  he  believed  had  practical  utility, 
if  they  were  tested  by  the  Scriptures  and  followed  only  so 
far  as  they  were  in  obvious  agreement  with  them.  ' '  Those 
who  sit  in  Moses'  seat  are  to  be  honored  and  obeyed  only 
so  far  as  their  teachings  accord  with  those  of  Moses.  It  is 
only  when  the  clergy  and  Doctors  agree  with  the  true  and 
sole  Teacher  and  lead  us  to  Him  that  we  ought  to  listen 
to  them."  On  the  critical  question  as  to  whether  the 
Gospel  is  to  be  accepted  on  the  authority  of  the  Church 
or  the  Church  on  the  authority  of  the  Gospel,  Wessel 
thus  states  his  position:  "It  is  for  God's  sake  that  we 
believe  the  Gospel,  and  it  is  for  the  Gospel's  sake  that  we 
believe  the  Church  and  the  pope.  We  do  not  believe  the 
Gospel  for  the  Church's  sake."  He  so  interprets  Augus- 
tine's famous  utterance  on  the  subject  as  to  make  it  accord 
with  his  own  conviction.  In  his  letter  to  Engelbert, 
replying  to  the  statement  that  the  Church  is  governed  by 
the  Holy  Spirit,  he  writes:  "Yes,  but  only  in  so  far  as  the 
Church  is  holy  and  exercises  its  saving  power,  not,  however, 
when  it  is  ignorant  or  in  error  as,  alas,  it  often  is."  Else- 
where he  says:  "We  believe  in  God,  speaking  by  the 
Holy  Spirit  in  the  Scriptures,  not  in  the  Catholic 
Church,  not  in  the  Latin  Councils,  not  in  the  pope." 

Citations  might  be  multiplied  illustrating,  from  different 
standpoints,  the  authority  which  Wessel  attributed  to  the 
Scriptures.  In  his  letter  to  Jacob  Hoeck,  who  had  re- 
minded him  that  he  ought  to  obey  the  pope  rather  than 
follow  his  own  reason,  he  writes:   "What  is  reason  to  me 


Wessel  as  a  Protestant  i37 

in  these  matters?  Is  it  not  the  Holy  Scriptures?"  This 
implies  that  to  him  the  Scriptures  were  the  norm  of  rehg- 
ious  judgment  or  conscience.  He  freely  admits,  however, 
that  as  an  authority  the  Scriptures  require  careful  inter- 
pretation. A  layman,  nevertheless,  may  appeal  to  them 
as  against  the  decision  of  a  Church  council.  But  one 
must  not  content  himself  with  the  superficial  meaning  of 
Scripture;  he  must  compare  Scripture  with  Scripture, 
avoid  distorting  its  meaning,  and  give  due  weight  to 
the  objections  of  his  opponents.  The  opinion  of  an 
expert  in  biblical  interpretation  is  to  be  preferred  to  that 
of  an  inexpert  prelate.  Yet  it  is  the  spirit  of  love  rather 
than  mere  zeal  for  knowledge  that  aids  most  in  arriving 
at  the  truth.  At  present,  he  says,  "it  is  the  dense  forest 
of  decrees  and  decretals  that,  by  its  very  complexity, 
makes  the  study  and  knowledge  of  the  Scriptures  im- 
possible." 

No  less  distinctly  Protestant  is  Wessel's  conception 
of  the  Church.  The  medieval  Roman  Catholic  thought 
of  the  Church  as  a  visible  institution,  always  and  every- 
where the  same,  deriving  its  unity  from  its  relation  to 
one  person,  the  Vicegerent  of  Christ  on  earth.  Its  mem- 
bership was  strictly  limited  to  those  who  accept  its 
doctrines,  obey  its  authority,  and  receive  its  sacra- 
ments. Other  Christians  might  exist  outside  its  bounds, 
but  they  were  either  heretical  or  schismatic,  and  so 
formed  no  part  of  the  Catholic  Church.  Wessel  opposed  to 
this  objective  and  institutional  notion  of  the  Church  a 
conception  more  subjective  and  spiritual.  In  his  thought 
it  is  not  the  pope  but  Christ  who  gives  unity  to  the  Church. 
It  is  not  certain  relations  to  an  institution,  but  a  certain 
attitude  to  Christ  that  constitutes  a  man  a  member  of 
the  Church.  National  boundaries  and  lack  of  ecclesiasti- 
cal associations  offer  no  obstacle  to  such  membership. 
The  Catholic  Church  embraces  all  true  followers  of  Jesus 


138  Wessel  Gansfort 

Christ  in  all  parts  of  the  world.  It  is  substantially  what 
we  mean  by  the  phrase,  "the  Church  Universal."  The 
passage  in  the  treatise  on  The  Sacrament  of  Penance 
and  the  Keys  of  the  Church  is  so  characteristic  that  it 
may  well  be  given  at  some  length.  ' '  The  common  belief 
in  the  absolute  rule  of  the  Roman  pontiff  is  untenable 
in  view  of  the  fact  that  it  is  impossible  for  one  man  to 
know  the  territory  of  the  whole  earth,  which  has  never 
been  entirely  included  in  the  works  of  any  cosmographer. 
For  how  shall  he  judge  those  whom  he  cannot  know? 
How  shall  he  judge  the  faith  of  a  man  whose  language 
he  is  not  acquainted  with?  Hence  we  reach  the  conclu- 
sion that  the  Holy  Spirit  has  kept  for  Himself  the  task  of 
encouraging,  quickening,  preserving,  and  increasing  the 
unity  of  the  Church,  He  has  not  left  it  to  a  Roman  pon- 
tiff who  often  pays  no  attention  to  it.  We  ought  to  ac- 
knowledge one  Catholic  Church,  yet  to  acknowledge  its 
unity  as  the  unity  of  the  faith  and  of  the  Head,  the  unity 
of  the  corner-stone,  not  the  unity  of  its  director,  Peter, 
or  his  successor.  For  what  could  Peter  in  Italy  do  for 
those  in  India  endangered  by  temptation  or  persecution 
except  pray  for  them,  even  though  he  had  greater  power 
than  his  successors?  Or  what  could  be  done  during  the 
fiercest  persecution  against  the  teachers  of  error  in  differ- 
ent parts  of  the  world?  What  decrees  or  General  Coun- 
cils were  able  to  hold  the  Church  together  even  in  external 
unity?  Hence  it  is  only  the  internal  unity  of  its  one 
essential  Head  that  is  implied  in  the  words  of  the  Apostles' 
Creed.  For  to-day  in  accordance  with  the  very  word 
of  the  Lord  the  testimony  of  the  Gospel  has  been  received 
even  at  the  ends  of  the  earth,  and  Christians  are  actually 
to  be  found  beyond  the  Hyperboreans,  beyond  the  Indians 
and  Scythians,  beyond  the  Ethiopians,  beyond  the  Tropic 
of  Capricorn!  To  these  Christians  widely  separated  in 
land  and  tongue  no  decrees  of  a  Roman  pontiff  or  of  our 


Wessel  as  a  Protestant  139 

General  Councils  of  Constance  or  Basel  can  be  known 
by  any  human  means.  And,  nevertheless,  they  together 
with  us  constitute  one  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church 
in  the  oneness  of  faith,  piety,  and  true  love,  even  if  they 
do  not  know  that  there  is  a  Rome  or  a  Roman  pontiff." 

Closely  related  to  this  idea  of  the  Church  and  necessi- 
tated by  it  is  his  conception  of  the  communion  of  the 
saints.  It  is  nothing  less  than  the  spiritual  fellowship 
that  exists  between  those  of  all  climes  and  ages  who  have 
become  sons  of  God  by  the  exercise  of  a  common  faith 
and  hope  and  love.  They  constitute  a  spiritual  brother- 
hood in  which  each  shares  in  the  others'  virtues  and 
blessings.  This  communion  is  not  interrupted  by  the 
quarrels  or  the  heresies  of  the  prelates,  nor  can  any  true 
believer  be  excluded  therefrom  by  the  decree  of  the  pope. 
"All  the  saints  share  in  a  true  and  essential  unity,  even  as 
many  as  unitedly  hold  fast  to  Christ  in  one  faith  and  hope 
and  love.  It  matters  not  under  what  prelates  they  may 
live,  or  how  ambitiously  these  prelates  may  dispute  or 
disagree  or  wander  from  the  truth  or  even  become  heretical. 
,  It  matters  not  what  distances  in  space  or  intervals  or 
I  years  may  separate  them.  It  is  of  this  fellowship  that 
we  say  in  the  Creed :  *  I  believe  in  the  communion  of  the 
saints.'  Hence  all  our  forefathers  have  shared  in  it 
with  us,  being  baptized  with  the  same  baptism,  refreshed 
with  the  same  spiritual  food,  and  revived  by  the  same 
spiritual  rock  as  ourselves.  This  unity  and  fellowship 
of  the  saints  is  in  nowise  destroyed  by  differences  or 
advanced  by  agreement  among  those  who  rule  them,  for 
neither  the  impiety  or  even  heresy  of  their  rulers  can 
injure  godly  men.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  acknowledged 
j  that  a  truly  pious  Greek  at  Constantinople,  subject  to  his 
'  schismatic  patriarch,  may  possibly  believe  everything 
that  a  Latin  at  Rome  believes.  How  then  does  the 
heretical  perversion  of  his  rulers  harm  him  ?     The  unity  of 


140  Wessel  Gansfort 

the  Church  under  one  pope  is,  therefore,  merely  accidental. 
Though  it  may  contribute  much  to  the  communion  of  the 
saints,  it  is  not  essential  to  it." 

Wessel  taught  also  the  Protestant  doctrine  of  the  priest- 
hood of  all  believers.  That  there  was  no  official  clergy 
in  the  Apostolic  Church,  and  that  every  Christian  had 
equally  direct  access  to  God  are  facts  that  lie  upon  the 
surface  of  the  earliest  Christian  records.  But  gradually 
the  lay  officers  of  the  early  Church,  influenced  by  Jewish 
and  pagan  precedent,  began  to  assume  sacerdotal  func- 
tions; and  after  the  second  century  this  hierarchical  tend- 
ency developed  rapidly.  Long  before  Wessel's  time  the 
conception  of  the  priesthood  of  all  believers  had  almost 
disappeared  from  the  thought  of  the  Church,  the  Mystics 
alone  emphasizing  it.  To  this  development  Cyprian, 
at  the  middle  of  the  third  century,  had  given  a  great 
impulse  by  insisting  that  "no  man  can  have  God  as  his 
father  who  has  not  the  Church  as  his  mother."  With 
this  idea  that  an  institution  must  intervene  between  the 
individual  soul  and  God  Wessel  had  no  sympathy  what- 
ever. This  comes  out  clearly  in  his  teaching  concerning 
justification,  in  his  conception  of  the  sacraments,  in  his 
denial  of  the  Church's  right  to  impose  penance,  in  his 
contention  for  the  right  of  individual  interpretation  of 
Scripture,  and  in  his  constant  reference  to  Christ's  inti- 
mate relations  to  his  followers  as  illustrating  those  which 
the  Christian  may  still  sustain  to  him.  In  the  treatise 
on  the  Sacrament  of  Penance  occurs  this  significant 
passage:  "There  is  a  double  priesthood.  The  one  is  a 
matter  of  rank  and  is  sacramentally  communicated. 
The  other  is  inherent  in  our  rational  nature  and  so  is 
common  to  all  men.  The  second  is  sufficient  without  the 
first,  but  without  the  second  the  first  involves  guilt.  The 
second  by  itself  imparts  grace.  By  it  Saint  Anthony  ex- 
celled many  bishops,  and  a  tanner  excelled  Saint  Anthony. 


Wessel  as  a  Protestant  141 

The  Apostles  were  consecrated  and  anointed  by  the  Holy 
Spirit,  since  the  Holy  Spirit  is  the  ointment  which  Christ 
earned  for  us  by  his  death.  Therefore  we  have  all  been 
baptized  and  anointed  by  the  death  of  Christ  and  the 
Holy  Spirit.  We  find  that  Christ  consecrated  both  the 
Apostles  and  his  other  disciples,  since  they  all  received 
the  ointment  of  the  Holy  Spirit."  That  Wessel  believed 
that  each  Christian  possessed  immediate  access  to  God  is 
evident,  not  only  from  such  statements  as  the  one  above, 
and  from  his  frequent  reference  to  desert  saints  who 
achieved  their  sanctity  without  priestly  aid,  but  also  from 
the  discussion  on  the  Passion  of  our  Lord,  where  concern- 
ing our  appropriation  of  the  burnt  offering  of  our  High 
Priest,  he  affirms:  "All  power  in  heaven  and  earth  is 
given  to  him,  whoever  he  may  be,  who  wished  to  be  his 
minister.  But  every  son  of  God  ministers  to  him  as  to 
the  first-born." 

Holding  this  conception  of  the  universal  priesthood  of 
believers,  it  was  inevitable  that  Wessel  should  have  set 
radical  Hmitations  upon  the  powers  and  prerogatives  of  the 
hierarchy.  According  to  the  more  generally  accepted 
theory  of  the  times,  all  the  authority  possessed  by  the 
priesthood  converged  upon  the  occupant  of  Saint  Peter's 
chair,  and  all  the  light  of  the  Spirit's  illumination  of  the 
Church  came  to  a  focus  in  him  and  found  unerring  expres- 
sion in  his  official  utterances.  He  was  the  Church's 
High  Priest,  mediating  God's  grace  to  the  faithful.  He 
was  also  the  Church's  ruler,  in  whom  all  the  functions  of 
government  coalesced.  Wessel  has  not  much  to  say  in 
direct  criticism  of  the  parish  priesthood,  but  what  he  says 
concerning  the  pope  and  the  prelates  applies  by  clear 
impHcation  to  all  those  belonging  to  the  hieratic  system. 
Their  only  true  service,  he  insists,  is  pastoral.  They  are 
undershepherds  of  God's  flock.  They  are  physicians 
of  the  soul,  ministering  to  the  sin-sick.     They  have  no 


142  Wessel  Gansfort 

authority  over  those  they  serve  other  than  what  is  neces- 
sary "for  such  a  peaceable  and  inoffensive  association  of  the 
sons  of  God  with  each  other  as  may  be  effected  by  the 
prudence  and  care  of  frail  man,  when  assisted  by  God." 
All  assumptions  of  authority,  all  interventions  between 
the  individual  believer  and  God,  all  attempts  to  lord  it 
over  God's  heritage  are  in  the  nature  of  usurpations.  The 
proper  functions  of  the  pope  are  the  same  as  those  of  the 
priest.  He  should  preach  the  gospel,  conduct  public 
worship,  perform  the  sacraments,  warn,  counsel,  per- 
suade, and  comfort  his  fellow  Christians,  and  maintain 
peace  and  order  in  the  Church.  When  he  exceeds  these 
ministries,  he  invades  the  rights  of  the  individual  son 
of  God  and  assumes  powers  which  God  alone  can 
exercise. 
^  Wessel  did  not  advocate  the  overthrow  of  the  papacy, 
nor  did  any  of  the  Reformers  at  the  first.  They  came 
to  that  only  when  convinced  by  experience  that  it  could 
not  be  enlisted  in  the  cause  of  reform.  Wessel  enjoins 
reverence  and  love  and  obedience  to  good  popes  and 
prelates.  His  attitude  in  this  matter  resembles  that  of 
Erasmus,  who  was  eager  to  improve  but  had  no  thought 
of  destroying  the  historic  ecclesiastical  structure.  He  was 
conscious  of  the  grave  defects  in  the  administration  of  the 
Church  and  criticized  severely  the  character  and  the 
policies  of  the  prelates  of  his  day.  He  does  not  spare 
even  his  former  friend,  Sixtus  IV,  whose  nepotism  and 
political  intrigues  invited  censure.  But  while  lamenting 
the  corrupt  and  tyrannical  administration  of  the  Church, 
he  comforted  himself  with  the  assurance  that  God's 
grace  is  so  great  and  the  influence  of  His  Spirit  upon  His 
children  so  strong  that  unjust  rulers  and  corrupt  prelates 
cannot  wholly  ruin  the  Church. 

Nevertheless,  the  Church  should  not  acquiesce  in  its 
mismanagement  by  the  clergy,  since  the  corruption  of  the 


Wessel  as  a  Protestant  143 

prelates  is  due  in  part  to  the  carelessness  and  folly  of  the 
Church,  even  as  bad  secular  rulers  are  God's  punishment 
of  the  sins  of  their  subjects.  If  the  people  were  to  insist 
upon  a  better  administration  of  the  Church  they  could 
secure  it.  It  is  their  duty  to  oppose  and  remove  evil 
prelates.  Those  who  ruin  the  Church  should  be  re- 
sisted by  all  Christians,  even  the  humblest,  even  by  peas- 
ants, according  to  the  statement  of  Jerome  that  "however 
much  a  pious  peasantry  may  build  up  the  Church  of 
God  by  the  excellency  of  their  lives,  they  harm  it  quite 
as  much  if  they  do  not  resist  those  that  are  destroying 
it."  The  relation  of  people  to  their  priests  is  that  of  volun- 
tary compact,  it  is  like  the  relation  that  exists  between 
patients  and  their  physician.  They  need  not  tolerate  the 
corrupt  or  negligent.  The  annual  election  of  their  superi- 
ors by  some  of  the  mendicant  orders  affords  a  suggestion 
of  the  way  to  rid  the  Church  of  unacceptable  prelates. 
In  fact,  Wessel  would  apply  the  principle  of  the  recall 
even  to  secular  rulers !  Its  application  to  the  pope  is  in  a 
form  so  picturesque  as  to  warrant  its  quotation  in  full. 
It  appears,  not  in  his  treatise  on  Ecclesiastical  Dignity 
and  Power  in  which  his  view  of  the  proper  functions  of  the 
priesthood  is  rhore  fully  elaborated,  but  in  his  discussion 
of  the  Keys  of  the  Church,  and  is  as  follows:  "Men  who 
are  sailing  amid  storms  and  tempests  with  an  experienced 
but  worn-out  pilot  may  oppose  him,  but  in  the  end  they 
ought  to  obey  him.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  if  the  pilot 
is  drunken  or  falls  asleep  and  lets  go  his  hold  of  the  helm 
and  allows  the  ship  to  be  driven  and  tossed  hither  and 
thither;  then  others,  who  are  skilled  in  seamanship,  not 
only  may  cast  him  aside  and  take  the  helm,  but  they 
ought  to  do  so,  having  regard  not  for  their  own  safety 
only  but  for  that  of  their  companions  in  the  ship.  So 
should  it  be  in  Peter's  boat!"  Wessel  doubtless  had  in 
mind  the  deposition  of  the  popes  by  the  Reforming  Coun- 


144  Wessel  Gansfort 

cils,  since  he  frequently  refers  to  the  pontiffs  thus  deposed 
as  examples  of  papal  corruption. 

Wessel's  conception  of  the  priesthood,  namely,  that  it 
is  wholly  pastoral  and  exists  only  for  the  edification  of 
the  Church,  led  him  to  set  sharp  limits  to  obedience  to 
priestly  or  papal  commands.  "The  canons  and  statutes 
of  prelates  have  no  more  authority  than  they  contain 
wisdom."  The  opinion  of  a  wise  layman  is  to  be  pre- 
ferred to  that  of  an  ill-informed  or  corrupt  pope,  and  it  is 
the  task  of  the  true  theologian  to  determine  what  com- 
mands of  a  pontiff  are  obligatory.  As  to  the  power  to 
"bind  and  loose"  and  "the  gift  of  the  keys, "  these  amount 
to  nothing  more  than  Christ's  endowment  of  his  followers 
with  the  ministry  of  the  Gospel  and  the  gift  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  By  the  proclamation  of  the  Gospel  they  release 
believers  from  their  sins,  and  open  the  door  of  the  kingdom 
to  them.  It  may  be  admitted  that  in  a  certain  sense  the 
pope  is  the  successor  of  Saint  Peter,  but  like  Saint  Peter 
he  is  subject  to  error  and  may  need  correction.  He  has 
no  judicial  authority  whatsoever,  and  no  power  to  teach 
or  command  beyond  the  doctrines  and  precepts  of  the 
Gospel.  He  no  more  possesses  the  keys  of  the  kingdom 
than  does  any  other  person  endowed  with  the  Gospel  and 
the  Holy  Spirit. 

In  his  conception  of  the  sacraments,  also,  Wessel  was 
distinctly  Protestant.  Here  as  elsewhere  his  views  were 
based  on  the  New  Testament  and  the  usages  of  the 
early  Church.  Though  he  was  aware  that  the  sacramental 
system  of  his  day  was  of  somewhat  recent  development, 
he  was  not  disposed  to  abolish  the  ceremonies  that  lent 
impressiveness  to  these  solemn  transactions  of  the  Church. 
He  would,  however,  confine  their  significance  to  that  which 
they  possessed  in  the  primitive  Church.  They  were  not 
devices  for  the  automatic  transmission  of  spiritual  bene- 
fits.    They  are  means  of  grace,  like  the  Gospel  itself,  and 


Wessel  as  a  Protestant  i45 

their  benefit  to  the  recipient  depends  wholly  upon  his 
attitude  of  receptivity.  In  the  form  in  which  they  were 
celebrated  in  the  Church  they  were  by  no  means  the  sine 
qua  non  to  a  robust  Christian  life — witness  the  desert 
saints  and  others  inaccessible  to  the  Church.  It  is  even 
implied  that  there  may  be  a  valid  celebration  of  the 
sacraments  which,  like  that  of  the  Friends,  is  purely 
spiritual.  "He  who  believes  feeds  upon  the  body  of 
Christ,  even  though  it  be  nowhere  externally  offered  to 
him."  Statements  like  this  were  apparently  the  result 
of  a  strong  reaction  from  the  Schoolmen's  emphasis  upon 
what  might  be  called  the  automatic  mechanism  of  the 
sacraments. 

The  tendency  of  Wessel's  teachings  concerning  the 
Eucharist  is  clearly  seen  in  the  position  taken  by  two  of 
his  disciples,  Cornelius  Honius  and  Zwingli.  The  former, 
who  endured  long  imprisonment  as  a  result  of  his  advocacy 
of  evangelical  doctrines,  wrote  a  treatise  on  the  Eucharist 
in  which  he  states  that  when  our  Lord,  in  the  institution 
of  the  sacrament,  said,  "This  is  my  body,"  he  meant: 
This  signifies  my  body.  Though  many  of  Wessel's  state- 
ments imply  this  interpretation,  Honius  was  the  first 
to  state  it  explicitly.  Zwingli  apparently  formed  his 
memorial  theory  of  the  Eucharist  as  a  result  of  his  reading 
of  Wessel's  long  devotional  treatise  on  that  subject, 
which  came  into  his  hands  about  1520,  when  his  religious 
ideas  were  still  plastic.  The  conception  there  presented 
was  one  that  commended  itself  to  the  noble  rationalism 
which  was  such  a  marked  characteristic  of  the  Swiss 
Reformer. 

Wessel's  dissent  from  current  teaching  concerning  the 
sacrament  of  penance  was  no  less  radical.  He  denied 
that  the  priest  in  the  confessional  possessed  any  judicial 
authority  whatever.  The  imposition  of  penance  as  a 
condition  of  the  penitent's  absolution  not  only  obscured 

VOL.    1 — 10 


146  Wessel  Gansfort 

the  free  gift  of  divine  forgiveness,  but  it  caused  the  penitent 
sorrow  when  God  intended  that  he  should  have  joy. 
Oral  confession  may  have  value  in  bringing  one  to  a 
clearer  recognition  of  his  sins,  but  it  is  not  essential  to 
repentance  or  to  forgiveness.  As  for  satisfaction  for 
sin  rendered  by  doing  penance,  the  only  "works  meet  for 
repentance"  are  love  and  joy  and  gratitude.  God  for- 
gets our  forgiven  sins  and  desires  us  to  do  the  same.  The 
father  in  the  parable  sought  to  blot  out  his  son's  memory 
of  his  life  in  the  far  country  by  the  warmth  of  his  welcome. 
He  would  not  listen  to  his  confession.  With  this  denial 
of  the  validity  of  the  whole  penitential  system,  Wessel 
cut  the  foundation  from  under  the  custom  of  granting 
indulgences,  which  he  attacked  in  a  much  more  radical 
fashion  than  did  Luther  in  his  famous  theses.  These 
assailed  the  abuses  of  indulgences,  Wessel  attacked  the 
entire  system  of  indulgences  as  lacking  warrant  in  the 
Scriptures  or  the  usages  of  the  early  Church  and  as 
injurious  to  Christian  morality. 

In  many  lesser  matters  also,  Wessel  assumed  what 
is  now  accepted  as  the  Protestant  position.  He  dis- 
missed the  idea  of  Purgatory  as  a  place  of  suffering  and 
substituted  for  it  a  Paradise,  in  which  the  redeemed 
though  imperfect  soul  is  purified  through  increasing  know- 
ledge and  love  of  Christ.  It  is  a  place  also  of  hope  for 
the  heathen  world,  since  here  Christ  himself  presents 
the  eternal  Gospel.  Though  at  different  periods  Wessel 
had  close  relations  with  those  prominent  in  monastic 
life  and  spent  his  last  days  in  cloisters,  yet  he  consistently 
denied  the  special  sanctity  of  the  celibate  life.  Virgin 
purity  might,  he  affirmed,  dwell  in  the  devout  heart  of  a 
Queen  Mother  as  well  as  in  that  of  a  nun.  Abraham's 
vocation  as  the  founder  of  a  race  was  no  less  sacred  than 
that  of  John  the  Baptist.  This  was  a  most  radical 
position,  for  the  monastic  ideal  of  holiness  had  dominated 


Wessel  as  a  Protestant  147 

the  clergy  and  the  Church  for  five  hundred  years.  The 
conspicuous  features  of  the  popular  religious  life  of  the 
medieval  Church  such  as  the  observance  of  special  days, 
devotions  at  certain  shrines,  pilgrimages,  prayers  to 
certain  saints,  the  use  of  the  crucifix,  the  rosary,  etc. — 
these  have  no  place  in  Wessel' s  thought.  That  he  did 
not  use  a  rosary  or  any  other  mechanical  aid  to  prayer, 
and  that  he  left  requests  that  there  should  be  no  masses 
or  prayers  said  for  the  repose  of  his  soul,  are  indications 
of  his  complete  emancipation  from  the  common  religious 
customs  of  his  day.  He  venerated  the  memory  of  the 
Blessed  Virgin,  as  he  had  been  taught  years  before  by 
Thomas  a  Kempis,  but  the  worship  of  the  saints  and  the 
special  cults  of  the  Church  made  no  appeal  to  him.  His 
religious  life  was  enriched  by  the  ministries  of  the  Church, 
but  he  drew  his  instruction  directly  from  the  Word  of 
God,  and  found  his  joy  and  inspiration  in  immediate 
communion  with  Christ. 

Even  more  significant  was  what  might  be  called  Wessel's 
Protestant  attitude  of  mind.  He  resented  human  au- 
thority in  matters  of  faith,  and  human  mediation  in 
the  great  transactions  of  the  soul  with  God.  With  him 
religion  was  individual  rather  than  institutional.  It  was 
the  result  of  a  man's  attitude  toward  God  rather  than  his 
relations  to  the  Church.  Religious  truth  was  not  some- 
thing already  possessed  in  complete  and  unchangeable 
form,  it  was  something  to  be  arrived  at  by  free  investiga- 
tion of  Scripture  and  open-minded  discussion.  In  the 
presentation  of  Christian  doctrine  his  tendency  was  to 
simplify  and  rationalize  it.  Since  he  found  God  in  the 
natural  rather  than  in  the  supernatural,  miracles  whether 
biblical  or  ecclesiastical  form  an  almost  negligible  factor 
in  his  thinking.  The  miraculous  disappears  wholly  in 
his  theory  of  the  sacraments.  He  had  little  sympathy 
with  ascetic  and  other-worldly  types  of  piety,  and  placed 


148  Wessel  Gansfort 

emphasis  primarily  on  faith  and  love  toward  God  and 
secondarily  on  the  active  Christian  virtues.  The  ideals 
of  the  Apostolic  Church  constituted  for  him  the  permanent 
norm  of  Church  life.  His  last  words :  "  I  know  nothing 
but  Jesus  Christ,  and  him  crucified, "  indicate  how  com- 
pletely he  had  emancipated  himself  from  all  non-essentials 
in  religion  and  placed  his  reliance  on  the  free  grace  of 
God  revealed  in  His  Son. 


CHAPTER  IX 
wessel's  relation  to  the  reformation  movement 

While  Wessel  may  well  claim  our  attention  as  a  great 
fifteenth-century  scholar  of  evangelical  spirit,  yet  our 
interest  in  him  centers  naturally  in  his  contribution  toward 
a  movement  that  culminated  long  after  his  death.  The 
Reformation  is  a  fact  of  such  supreme  importance  that 
men  living  in  the  period  preceding  it  are  largely  estimated 
with  reference  to  it.  Erasmus,  Wessel's  most  celebrated 
compatriot,  in  spite  of  his  great  services  to  classical  and 
biblical  learning,  has  suffered  in  popular  esteem  because 
of  his  failure  to  ally  himself  with  the  evangelical  move- 
ment to  whose  beginning  he  gave  such  a  strong  impulse. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  memory  of  a  group  of  otherwise 
relatively  obscure  men  has  been  preserved  chiefly  because 
they  have  been  regarded  as  precursors  of  the  Reformation. 
Their  work  has  been  estimated,  not  so  much  by  its  impor- 
tance to  their  own  age,  as  by  its  influence  upon  a  movement 
that  was  scarcely  within  the  horizon  of  their  thought. 
Wessel  was  conscious  that  a  change  was  soon  to  come 
over  the  Church.  In  his  later  years  he  was  accustomed 
to  predict  this  with  great  positiveness.  It  was  to  come 
within  the  lifetime  of  his  students.  But  the  change  that 
he  anticipated  was  not  to  overthrow  the  constitution 
of  the  Church  nor  recast  its  dogmatic  system  nor  trans- 
form its  worship.  What  he  consciously  worked  for  and 
looked  for  was  a  change  in  theological  method,  the  re- 
cognition of  the    Scriptures    as   the    supreme  religious 

149 


150  Wessel  Gansfort 

authority,  an  amendment  in  the  administration  of  the 
Church,  a  curtailment  of  the  power  of  the  pope  and  the 
prelates.  It  is  probable  that  he  would  have  been  quite 
appalled  by  such  a  revolutionary  program  as  that  of 
Luther  or  Zwingli. 

Yet  after  this  has  been  said  it  still  remains  true  that  the 
influence  of  such  a  life  as  that  of  Wessel  tended  strongly 
to  prepare  the  way  for  Protestantism.  This  becomes  the 
more  apparent  when  we  recall  the  age  in  which  he  lived, 
the  second  century  of  the  Renaissance,  the  pivotal  period 
in  the  transition  from  medieval  to  modern  times.  When 
we  contrast  the  men  who  were  shaping  the  thought  and 
controlling  the  policy  of  the  Church  at  the  time  of  Wessel's 
birth  with  that  remarkable  group  of  men  who  were  coming 
to  positions  of  leadership  at  the  time  of  his  death  we  are 
impressed  with  the  transitional  character  of  his  age.  A 
few  familiar  examples  will  serve  to  illustrate  this.  Wessel's 
mature  life  spanned  the  distance  between  Laurentius 
Valla  and  Erasmus  and  between  Gerson  and  Luther. 
Huss  was  burned  five  years  before  Wessel's  birth  and 
Zwingli  was  born  five  years  before  Wessel's  death.  Con- 
stantinople fell  when  he  was  thirty-three  years  of  age, 
printing  was  invented  when  he  was  thirty-five.  During 
his  lifetime  began  those  explorations  which  three  years 
after  his  death  culminated  in  the  discovery  of  the  western 
continent.  His  was  an  age  full  of  important  happenings 
and  alert  with  eager  expectation.  In  such  an  age,  the 
influence  of  a  life  like  that  of  Wessel,  exerted  at  centers 
of  learning,  could  not  but  contribute  to  the  slowly  gather- 
ing forces  which  were  to  combine  in  the  Protestant 
movement. 

It  is  obvious  that  Wessel  assisted  in  carrying  forward 
the  movement  toward  the  better  administration  of  the 
Church  and  the  curtailment  of  papal  authority  of  which 
the  Reforming  Councils  were  the  most  prominent  expres- 


Tablet  Marking  the  Tomb  of  Wessel  Gansfort,  Originally  in  the  Convent 
of  the  Spiritual  Virgins,  now  in  the  Church  of  St.  Martin 


Wessel  and  the  Reformation  151 

sion.  His  conscious  sympathy  with  the  great  French 
leaders  of  this  movement,  Peter  d'Ailly  and  John  Gerson, 
is  evident  from  his  approving  citations  from  their  works. 
In  his  frank  criticism  of  abuses  in  the  Church  and  his 
advocacy  of  radical  amendment  in  its  administration, 
Wessel  stood  in  succession  to  these  noble  men  and  those 
whom  they  represented. 

He  also  afforded  in  himself  an  illustration  of  the  early 
blending  of  two  distinct  tendencies  which  were  to  unite 
so  strikingly  in  Luther  and  many  of  his  colleagues.  From 
Thomas  a  Kempis  and  the  Brethren  of  the  Common 
Life,  Wessel  had  early  received  influences  which  strongly 
tended  toward  a  mystical  type  of  piety;  at  Cologne 
and  Paris  he  had  been  trained  in  the  rigid  discipline  of 
the  Schoolmen.  The  uniting  of  these  two  streams  of 
influence  in  Wessel  made  him  appear  as  something  of  an 
anomaly  to  his  contemporaries.  He  had  the  fervid  simple 
piety  of  the  Brethren  and  a  fondness  for  exact  definition 
and  a  passion  for  logical  precision  to  which  the  typical 
mystic  was  a  stranger.  In  this  combination  he  presents 
a  remote  archetype  of  the  modern  Christian  scholar  in 
whom  evangelical  fervor  and  critical  acumen  combine. 

As  a  Humanist  and,  in  the  northern  lands  at  least,  as  a 
pioneer  in  the  study  and  teaching  of  Greek  and  Hebrew, 
Wessel  unquestionably  rendered  important  service  in  the 
preparation  for  the  Reformation.  It  is  a  significant 
fact  that  the  interest  of  scholars  in  the  study  of  the  so- 
called  sacred  languages  was  a  necessary  preliminary  to 
popular  interest  in  the  Scriptures  when  they  should  ap- 
pear in  the  vernacular.  The  Reformation  leaders  came 
to  their  convictions  largely  because  of  their  first-hand 
knowledge  of  the  Scriptures  and  the  Fathers.  They 
were  able  to  convey  their  convictions  to  others,  because 
they  could  assure  them  that  they  were  based  upon  an 
accurate  knowledge  of  the  Word  of  God.     They  could 


152  Wessel  Gansfort 

also  offer  their  vernacular  translations  with  the  assurance 
that  they  rendered  faithfully  the  meaning  of  the  original. 
To  all  this  a  knowledge  of  Greek  and  Hebrew  was  an 
absolute  essential.  Consequently  men  like  Wessel  and 
his  pupils,  if  we  may  so  call  them,  Agricola  and  Reuchlin, 
who  popularized  the  study  of  these  languages  in  the 
universities,  were  not  only  creating  a  demand  among 
scholars  for  the  critical  editions  of  the  Scriptures  which 
Erasmus  was  soon  to  bring  out,  but  were  also  making 
possible  a  widespread  popular  reading  of  the  Bible  in 
the  following  generation.  The  synchronism  of  this 
new  interest  in  the  sacred  languages  and  the  invention  of 
printing  is  a  fact  of  unique  importance.  The  first  printed 
copy  of  the  Latin  Bible  appeared  in  1455,  when  Wessel 
was  thirty-five  years  of  age;  the  first  Hebrew  Bible  was 
issued  from  the  press  the  year  following  his  death.  Eras- 
mus' critical  edition  of  the  Greek  New  Testament  appeared 
a  quarter  of  a  century  later,  in  15 16.  In  the  next  decade 
Bibles  were  printed  in  German  and  English  and  French. 

Wessel 's  contribution  to  what  might  be  called  the 
biblical  preparation  for  the  Reformation  may  be  illustrated 
by  his  relation  to  a  group  of  representative  humanistic 
leaders.  Notable  among  these  was  a  fellow-countryman 
who  is  best  known  by  his  Latinized  name,  Rudolph  Agri- 
cola.  He  was  a  native  of  the  village  of  Laflo  in  the 
neighborhood  of  Groningen  and  was  Wessel 's  junior  by 
twenty-three  years.  There  is  reason  to  believe  that  he 
made  Wessel's  acquaintance  before  he  left  the  Nether- 
lands; in  any  case,  he  was  much  in  his  company  at  Paris 
and  later  at  Groningen.  He  regarded  himself  as  a  disciple 
of  Wessel  and  was  deeply  influenced  by  his  teacher  and 
friend  not  only  in  the  pursuit  of  his  studies  in  the  biblical 
languages,  but  also  in  his  character  as  is  indicated  by  the 
more  earnest  and  evangelical  spirit  which  animated  him 
during  his  later  years.     He  was  recognized  as  one  of  the 


Wessel  and  the  Reformation  153 

leading  classical  and  Hebrew  scholars  of  his  day  and  did 
perhaps  more  than  any  other  man  to  popularize  humanistic 
studies  in  Germany.  Another  distinguished  Humanist 
who  fell  under  Wessel's  influence  while  in  Paris  was  John 
Reuchlin,  a  native  of  Pforzheim.  When  eighteen  years  of 
age  he  received  from  Wessel  his  first  lessons  in  philosophy 
and  Greek  and  very  probably  Hebrew  also,  and  later 
after  both  had  rem.oved  to  the  University  of  Basel,  he 
continued  to  receive  Wessel's  direction  in  his  studies. 
It  cannot  be  doubted  that  the  early  intimacy  of  Reuchlin 
with  this  distinguished  scholar  thirty-five  years  his  senior 
contributed  much  to  the  direction  of  his  life  interests. 
He  began  his  career  as  a  lawyer  and  was  engaged  in  the 
service  of  the  Count  of  Wiirttemberg;  later  he  accepted 
a  professorship  of  Greek  and  Hebrew  at  Ingolstadt. 
Though  he  rendered  important  service  to  the  cause  of 
classical  learning,  his  greatest  contribution  was  to  biblical 
scholarship  in  that  he  became  a  pioneer  in  the  introduction 
of  Hebrew  into  the  curricula  of  the  universities.  His 
efforts  on  this  behalf  involved  him  and  half  the  scholars 
of  Germany,  together  with  the  monks  and  the  papal 
court,  in  one  of  the  most  bitter  controversies  of  the 
period.  It  ended  in  a  formal  victory  for  the  obscurantists, 
who  would  have  prohibited  the  study  of  Hebrew  utterly, 
but  in  a  practical  triumph  for  Reuchlin,  since  over  forty 
leading  German  scholars  were  led  to  commit  themselves 
to  the  cause  that  he  had  advocated.  This  controversy 
had  been  precipitated  by  his  publication  of  a  Hebrew 
grammar  and  lexicon,  sorely  needed  helps  to  the  study 
of  that  hitherto  neglected  language.  It  is  to  be  recalled 
that  Reuchlin  was  the  uncle  and  patron  of  Melanchthon 
and  that  he  started  him  upon  his  academic  career. 

Prominent  in  the  circle  of  young  scholars  that  sur- 
rounded Wessel  in  his  later  days  at  Groningen  was  Alex- 
ander  Hegius.     As   is   clearly   indicated   in   the   letter, 


154  Wessel  Gansfort 

published  herewith,  written  after  a  visit  to  a  library  of 
rare  books  at  Basel,  he  regarded  himself  as  Wessel's 
disciple.  He  offers  him  any  of  the  books  that  he  has 
brought  back  with  him,  asks  if  he  may  borrow  his  Greek 
Testament,  and  concludes  by  saying  that  he  has  followed 
his  advice  as  to  the  method  of  instruction  in  the  school 
that  he  was  conducting.  This  fact  has  much  significance, 
as  Hegius  was  for  a  quarter  of  a  century  at  the  head  of 
the  great  school  of  the  Brethren  at  Deventer  which  had 
at  times  an  attendance  of  over  two  thousand,  and  counted 
Erasmus  and  many  other  men  of  note  among  its  students. 

Goswin  of  Halen  was  a  youth  in  the  monastery  of  Ad- 
werd  when  Wessel  made  it  one  of  his  homes,  and  apparently 
served  him  as  an  attendant.  It  is  he  who  writes  of  having 
heard  Wessel  and  Agricola  discuss  the  need  of  reform  in 
the  Church,  till  the  small  hours.  He  conceived  a  lifelong 
affection  for  Wessel,  made  a  collection  of  as  many  of  his 
writings  as  he  could  obtain,  and  is  responsible  through  his 
letters  for  the  preservation  of  many  interesting  incidents 
of  Wessel's  later  life.  He  became  a  man  of  influence  and 
was  for  many  years  head  of  the  House  of  the  Brethren  at 
Groningen.  He  lived  through  the  first  stage  of  the 
Reformation  and  identified  himself  with  it.  Through 
correspondence  with  him  Melanchthon  came  into  posses- 
sion of  the  facts  regarding  Wessel  that  were  incorporated 
in  the  oration  on  Agricola. 

One  other  example  of  Wessel's  disciples  in  the  Groningen 
circle  will  suffice  to  indicate  the  character  of  his  influence 
over  them.  Willem  Frederiks  was  among  those  who  in 
early  life  came  into  friendly  relations  with  Wessel  and 
later  carried  his  teachings  to  their  logical  consequences 
in  the  doctrines  of  the  Reformation.  He  was  a  man  of 
unusual  learning  and  eloquence,  a  popular  preacher  in 
St.  Martin's  Church  in  Groningen.  In  a  most  cordial 
letter  Erasmus  writes  to  him:     "You  shine  before  all 


Wessel  and  the  Reformation  155 

b}''  the  purity  of  your  life,  by  your  indefatigable  zeal  in 
feeding  the  flock  with  gospel  doctrine,  and  by  gathering 
about  you  clergy,  who  by  their  pure  morals  and  sacred 
learning  are  an  ornament  to  the  Church."  It  would  be 
possible  to  trace  the  effect  of  Wessel's  teachings  and 
personal  influence  into  a  much  wider  circle  if  one  were  to 
follow  them  into  what  might  be  called  the  second  genera- 
tion of  his  pupils.  Two  of  these  may  be  mentioned  in 
passing.  They  are  Albert  Hardenberg  and  Gerhard 
Geldenhauer,  pupils  of  Goswin,  who  became  able  and 
fearless  leaders  in  the  Reformation  in  the  Netherlands  and 
in  Germany.  Each  indicated  his  indebtedness  to  Wessel 
by  writing  a  sketch  of  his  life. 

Thus  far  we  have  been  concerned  with  the  effect  of 
Wessel's  personal  influence  and  teachings  upon  his  friends 
and  pupils.  But  he  exerted  a  much  wider,  if  less  intense, 
influence  through  his  writings,  of  which  there  were  origi- 
nally about  twenty.  With  the  exception  of  the  Mare 
Magnum,  composed  mainly  of  excerpts  from  the  writings 
of  others,  and  two  pamphlets  on  medical  practice,  they 
were  treatises  on  a  wide  range  of  religious  and  theological 
subjects.  In  bulk  they  would  have  made  a  volume  per- 
haps twice  the  size  of  the  Bible.  Most,  if  not  all,  of  theni\ 
were  written  during  the  last  ten  years  of  his  life.  The  _\ 
printing-press  was  already  coming  into  wide  use,  but 
there  is  no  record  of  any  of  Wessel's  works  being  printed 
until  about  thirty  years  after  his  death.  That,  however, 
would  not  necessarily  prevent  his  writings  from  having  a 
comparatively  wide  circulation.  Before  the  press  came 
to  his  assistance,  there  were  at  least  three  ways  by  which 
an  author  could  publish  his  book.  He  could  have  pro- 
fessional copyists  manifold  it  for  the  market;  he  could 
deposit  it  in  some  public  place  where  it  could  be  read  or 
copied  by  anyone  who  pleased;  or  he  might  read  it  or 
have  it  read  aloud  in  places  where  it  would  easily  attract  an 


156  Wessel  Gansfort 

audience.  It  was  possible  by  one  or  all  of  these  methods 
to  give  extensive  publicity  to  the  contents  of  a  new  book. 
Luther  in  his  letter  to  Rhodius  of  Utrecht  expresses 
surprise  that  the  works  of  Wessel  were  not  more  widely 
read.  He  writes:  "I  wonder  what  ill  luck  prevented 
this  most  Christian  author  from  being  more  extensively 
known, "  and  then  proceeds  to  offer  two  possible  explana- 
tions: perhaps  it  was  because  Wessel 's  life  was  so  un- 
eventful and  free  from  the  conflicts  which  had  called  the 
world's  attention  to  his  own  writings,  or  Wessel  may  have 
been  reluctant  to  give  publicity  to  his  views  lest  he  fall 
under  the  condemnation  of  the  inquisitor.  The  former  of 
these  explanations  doubtless  has  some  weight.  Wessel's 
life  had  in  it  none  of  the  elements  of  dramatic  interest 
and  conflict  with  established  authority  which  called  the 
attention  of  Europe  to  the  teachings  of  a  hitherto  obscure 
Saxon  monk.  But  the  other  explanation,  "fear  of  the 
Jews,"  as  Luther  expresses  it,  certainly  did  not  deter 
Wessel  from  a  free  expression  of  his  opinion  either  with 
his  pen  or  his  voice.  In  view  of  all  the  circumstances  it 
seems  probable  that  Luther  was  mistaken  as  to  the  extent 
to  which  Wessel's  writings  were  known.  They  had  not 
come  to  his  own  notice  till  he  was  well  launched  on  his 
career  as  a  Reformer,  and  he  not  unnaturally  inferred 
that  they  had  had  but  few  readers.  But  the  number 
of  men  in  different  regions  who  were  influenced  by  Wessel's 
writings  as  well  as  the  textual  variations  which  arose  from 
repeated  transcription  indicate  that  they  were  widely 
read,  at  least  in  the  Netherlands  and  neighboring  German 
states.  Dr.  Ludwig  Schulze  of  Rostock  speaks  of  Wessel's 
writings  as  "widely  diffused,  much  read  and  esteemed, 
and  influential."  Nevertheless,  there  were  forces  at  work 
that  limited  their  diffusion.  Hardenberg,  upon  the  au- 
thority of  those  who  had  witnessed  it,  states  that  soon 
after  his  death  "all  the  manuscripts  found  among  Wessel's 


Wessel  and  the  Reformation  157 

effects  were  by  the  zeal  of  the  Mendicant  Monks  and 
the  fury  of  some  others  committed  to  the  flames."  The 
older  nuns  in  the  convent  at  Groningen  informed  Harden- 
berg  that  they  had  seen  writings  belonging  to  Wessel 
burned  on  the  suspicion  that  they  were  heretical.  Copies 
must  have  existed  of  the  writings  thus  destroyed,  and 
several  of  his  writings  must  have  entirely  escaped  these 
vandals,  for  the  Mare  Magnum  and  the  copy  of  the  Greek 
New  Testament  presented  to  him  by  Pope  Sixtus  IV  were 
still  in  existence  in  the  following  century.  And  it  is 
beyond  question  that  several  of  Wessel's  writings,  now 
classified  as  lost,  were  in  circulation  during  the  sixteenth 
century.  Hence  it  would  seem  that  the  fury  of  the  in- 
quisitor which  could  not  reach  the  author  because  of  the 
protection  of  his  friends,  failed  to  a  large  degree  in  its 
effort  to  destroy  his  writings.  His  enemies  apparently 
succeeded  better  in  a  policy  of  obstruction,  by  which 
they  prevented  the  free  multiplication  and  distribution  of 
his  works,  using  their  influence  to  discredit  them  with 
students  and  others  who  might  be  disposed  to  read  them. 
Some  such  process  of  suppression  is  alluded  to  by  John 
Arnold  Bargellan  in  a  letter  prefixed  to  the  edition  of  the 
Farrago  published  in  Wittenberg  in  1522  in  which  he 
says  that  Wessel's  writings  "have  been  hindered  even  unto 
this  day."  And  Adam  Petri  in  the  introduction  to  his 
early  edition  of  the  Farrago  implies  the  same  in  his 
exclamation,  "Behold  what  an  author  has  been  removed 
out  of  the  way,  and  by  what  sort  of  men  and  for  what 
cause!  But  God  will  not  permit  these  writings  wholly 
to  perish." 

As  we  are  here  concerned  with  the  influence  of  Wessel's 
writings  only  as  they  contributed  to  the  Reformation 
cause,  we  may  disregard  the  printed  editions  of  his  works 
that  appeared  after  1550  when  the  Reformation  may 
be  said  to  have  been  an  accomplished  fact.     His  first 


158  Wessel  Gansfort 

■writings  to  receive  currency  by  the  aid  of  the  printing- 
press  were  those  issued  with  the  title  Farrago  about  1520. 
Under  the  impulse  of  Luther's  encouragement  it  soon 
passed  through  several  editions.  There  is  reason  to  believe 
that  presses  in  Heidelberg,  Basel,  and  Leipzig,  besides 
those  in  Wittenberg,  were  engaged  in  issuing  it.  The 
book  was  evidently  in  great  demand,  not  only  in  the 
Netherlands,  but  also  in  Germany  and  Switzerland.  But 
although  the  Farrago  presents  Wessel's  characteristic 
doctrines,  it  contains  but  a  small  fraction  of  his  writings. 
Its  popularity  naturally  led  to  the  publication  of  some 
of  his  other  writings.  A  small  collection  of  his  Letters 
and  a  treatise  on  the  Eucharist  were  issued  very  early, 
evidently  by  the  same  press,  but  without  any  indication 
of  date  or  place.  Soon  after  there  appeared  a  volume, 
apparently  in  Brussels,  containing  his  discussions  on  the 
Incarnation,  the  Passion,  and  the  Lord's  Prayer.  It  is 
now  demonstrated  that  at  least  one  of  Wessel's  works, 
De  Potestate  Ecclesiastica,  was  early  translated  into 
German.  Two  copies  of  this  rare  pamphlet  were  brought 
to  light  by  Professor  J.  J.  Doedes,  one  of  Wessel's  bio- 
graphers. A  photographic  copy  of  the  title-page  of  one 
of  these  copies,  now  in  the  University  Library  at  Gronin- 
gen,  was  recently  sent  the  writer  and  is  reproduced 
in  this  volume.  This  translation  which  apparently  ap- 
peared in  the  third  decade  of  the  sixteenth  century  indi- 
cates the  popular  interest  in  Wessel's  conception  of  the 
authority  of  the  Church.  Although,  as  has  just  been 
noticed,  selections  from  his  writings  began  to  be  published 
as  early  as  1520,  nearly  a  century  elapsed  before  in  1614 
the  first  complete  edition  of  his  extant  works  was  issued 
in  his  native  Groningen.  The  range  of  the  circulation 
of  his  writings  and  the  stir  that  their  teachings  had  oc- 
casioned, even  previous  to  the  meeting  of  the  Council  of 
Trent,  may  be  inferred  from  the  fact  that  the  Tridentine 


©on  gaiftlKbgcivalt  vnt>:VurDfgfbait/ 

Warcr  vhd  rccbtcrsdx):fam/  vnnt> 

:vicvilDcr*^rclatcn  gcpott 

vnnDgcfat5Dic  vnocr- 

rbonvcrpinDcn- 

The  Title-page  of  a  German  Translation  of  Wessel's  Essay  on 

Ecclesiastical  Dignity  and  Power,  Made  during 

the  Reformation 

[t  IS  the  only  one  of   Wessel's  writings   hitherto  translated.      There   are  several 
copies  in  existence 


Wessel  and  the  Reformation  159 

Fathers  honored  them  with  a  place  in  the  first  class  of 
prohibited  books. 

It  is  evident  that  whatever  may  have  been  the  circula- 
tion and  influence  of  Wessel's  writings  during  the  thirty 
years  between  his  death  and  the  first  printing  of  the  Far- 
rago, there  can  be  no  question  of  their  wide  circulation 
and  large  influence  in  the  decisive  years  that  followed 
1520.  They  appeared  just  in  time  to  win  many  to  the 
Protestant  cause  and  to  assist  in  shaping  the  doctrinal 
standards  of  the  Reformed  branch  of  Protestantism.  One 
evidence  of  this  is  to  be  found  in  the  ready  acceptance 
accorded  the  new  movement  in  the  three  centers  where 
the  last  years  of  Wessel's  life  were  spent  and  where  his 
writings  were  current,  Basel,  Heidelberg,  and  Frisia. 
Not  only  did  these  regions  show  their  readiness  to  join 
the  Reformation  movement,  but  they  also  manifested  a 
determined  preference  for  that  type  of  doctrine  of  which 
Wessel  was  the  first  and  in  some  respects  the  ablest 
advocate. 

Notice  should  be  made  of  the  tributes  paid  to  Wessel 
by  men  of  the  Reformation  period,  who  of  course  knew 
him  only  through  his  writings.  Some  of  these  are  the 
more  remarkable  because  of  the  singular  veneration  and 
affection  that  they  display.  The  jurist,  William  Sagarus, 
Councillor  in  Brabant  for  Charles  V,  had  so  great  an 
admiration  for  Wessel  that  he  was  accustomed  to  carry 
about  with  him  in  his  bosom  the  treatise  on  the  Causes 
of  the  Incarnation  and  to  declare  that  to  it  he  owed  his 
knowledge  of  Christ.  He  came  once  to  Groningen,  as  to  a 
shrine,  and  at  Adwerd  and  the  Convent  of  the  Spiritual 
Sisters  requested  that  he  might  see  any  memorials  of 
Wessel  that  they  possessed.  He  was  shown  some  of  his 
books  and  writings  and  also  his  skull,  which  he  reverently 
kissed  and  desired  to  purchase.  Evidently  some  of  the 
early  Protestants  retained  their  former  fondness  for  relics, 


i6o  Wessel  Gansfort 

for  another  ardent  disciple  of  Wessel,  Regner  Praedinius, 
Rector  of  St.  Martin's  School  at  Groningen,  a  schoolmate 
of  Hardenberg,  was  the  happy  possessor  at  this  time  of 
Wessel's  lower  jaw,  which  had  become  detached  from 
the  skull,  and  was  accustomed  to  display  it  to  his  friends 
as  one  of  his  very  special  treasures !  He  also  contributed 
much  to  the  dissemination  of  Wessel's  views,  which  he 
taught  with  great  enthusiasm  to  the  thousands  of  students 
that  attended  his  school. 

So  deep  an  impression  had  the  writings  of  Wessel  made 
upon  Adam  Petri  of  Basel  that  he  brought  out  two  edi- 
tions of  the  Farrago  and  wrote  in  a  letter  which  serves 
as  an  introduction:  "In  what  other  book  except  the 
Bible  have  you  ever  seen  the  whole  work  of  Christ  and  the 
contents  of  Scripture  set  forth  with  clearer  arguments,  or 
the  impostors  and  enemies  of  God  combated  with  stronger 
ones?  "  It  was  also  a  disciple  of  Wessel,  Rhodius,  who  suc- 
cessfully combated  Luther's  conception  of  the  Eucharist 
not  in  the  Netherlands  only  but  also  in  East  Frisia  and  in 
several  of  the  Swiss  cities.  It  will  be  recalled  that  among 
the  writings  of  Wessel  that  he  brought  to  Luther's  atten- 
tion was  a  treatise  on  the  Eucharist  which  Luther  did  not 
think  best  to  publish,  as  he  did  the  others,  but  sent  to 
CEcolampadius,  who  after  reading  it  with  approval  for- 
warded it  to  Zwingli.  This  treatise  may  be  accounted 
one  of  the  chief  influences  which  determined  these  Swiss 
leaders  to  take  the  position  they  did  regarding  the  sacra- 
ments. Martin  Bucer  also  came  under  the  spell  of  Rho- 
dius' convincing  arguments.  In  a  letter  he  tells  of  a  visit 
that  he  had  from  him  in  the  autumn  of  1524,  saying 
among  other  things:  "I  know  of  no  one,  not  even  Luther, 
whom  I  would  prefer  to  this  man  in  insight  and  judgment. 
.  .  .  Although  recognizing  Luther  as  his  teacher  he  owes 
much  more  along  certain  lines  to  Wessel."  He  then 
proceeds  to  tell  how  Rhodius,  Bible  in  hand,  reasoned 


Wessel  and  the  Reformation  i6i 

with  him  so  convincingly  that  he  was  forced  to  give  up 
the  idea  of  the  corporeal  presence  of  Christ  in  the  bread 
of  the  sacrament.  This  is  a  typical  case.  Rhodius  be- 
came recognized  as  a  leader  in  the  Eucharistic  con- 
troversy, but  the  doctrine  that  he  taught  with  such 
persuasiveness  he  had  derived  from  Wessel. 

The  effect  of  the  discovery  of  Wessel's  writings  upon 
Luther  is  given  in  his  well-known  letter  to  Rhodius, 
which  came  to  be  prefixed  as  an  introduction  to  the 
Wittenberg  edition  of  the  Farrago.  He  writes:  "But 
my  joy  and  courage  now  increase,  and  I  no  longer  have 
the  slightest  doubt  that  I  have  been  teaching  the  truth 
since  he,  living  in  so  different  a  time  and  under  such  diverse 
circumstances,  is  so  consistently  in  accord  with  me  in  all 
things."  To  this  statement  he  must  have  made  one 
mental  reservation:  he  did  not  agree  with  Wessel's  con- 
ception of  the  Eucharist.  Out  of  this  disagreement  arose 
largely  the  strife  which  divided  and  weakened  the  Pro- 
testant movement.  John  Faber,  Bishop  of  Vienna,  a 
strong  opponent  of  the  Reformation,  in  a  cleverly  con- 
ceived brochure  undertook  to  make  capital  out  of  Luther's 
statement  that  Wessel  had  been  divinely  instructed, 
by  showing  in  how  many  important  particulars  Wessel 
differed  from  him.  The  work,  which  appeared  in  Prague 
in  1528,  is  more  ingenious  than  convincing  and  is  of  interest 
chiefly  as  showing  that  the  Catholic  party  did  not  wish  to 
have  the  prestige  of  Wessel's  authority  appropriated  by 
their  opponents. 

It  is  improbable  that  Wessel  exerted  much  influence  over 
Erasmus.  Though  they  had  many  points  of  intellectual 
sympathy,  their  natures  were  quite  diverse,  and  the  great 
Humanist  would  doubtless  have  gone  his  own  way  without 
the  assistance  of  his  fellow-countryman.  Yet  by  populariz- 
ing biblical  studies,  Wessel  must  have  contributed  much  in 
preparation  for  Erasmus*  work.      For  a  whole  generation 


1 62  Wessel  Gansfort 

in  various  educational  centers  he  had  been  emphasizing 
the  supreme  worth  of  the  Bible  as  a  source  of  religious 
truth  and  the  value  of  a  knowledge  of  the  biblical  languages 
as  a  means  to  its  sure  interpretation.  The  young  men 
who  had  derived  these  ideas  from  Wessel,  and  there  must 
have  been  hundreds  if  not  thousands  of  them,  were  ready 
to  use  Erasmus'  critical  text  of  the  Bible  and  aids  to  its 
study  when  it  appeared.  In  his  pamphlet  on  False 
Evangelists,  Erasmus  indicates  his  familiarity  with 
Wessel's  writings  and  his  approval  of  the  irenic  spirit  in 
which  he  wrote.  He  says:  " Doctor  Wessel  has  much  in 
common  with  Luther.  But  in  how  much  more  Christlike 
and  modest  a  way  does  he  set  forth  his  doctrines  than  do 
most  of  the  theologians!"  It  is  interesting  to  notice 
that  one  of  Erasmus'  writings  on  practical  religion,  the 
Enchiridion,  was  bound  together  with  Wessel's  Farrago. 
Such  a  volume,  a  fine  example  of  the  early  bookbinders' 
art,  is  in  the  possession  of  the  library  of  Union  Theological 
Seminary,  New  York  City. 

It  was  to  be  expected  that  Melanchthon  would  recognize 
a  congenial  spirit  in  Wessel,  and  we  have  evidence  that 
such  was  the  case.  He  w^as  a  student  at  Heidelberg  where 
Wessel  had  taught  a  generation  before  and  where  his  name 
was  still  associated  with  that  of  Agricola  as  an  advocate 
of  the  New  Learning.  It  may  safely  be  assumed  that  dur- 
ing his  student  days  Melanchthon  gained  some  knowledge 
of  Wessel  and  his  characteristic  teachings.  Later  he  gave 
his  writings  careful  and  approving  study.  In  an  ora- 
tion on  Agricola,  whose  contents  he  must  have  sanctioned 
even  if  he  did  not  compose  it,  he  speaks  of  Wessel  as  the 
intimate  friend  of  Agricola,  and  goes  on  to  characterize 
him  as  having  "the  greatest  ability,  to  which  he  added 
the  widest  learning  in  all  kinds  of  knowledge,  having  also 
an  acquaintance  with  the  Greek  and  Hebrew  tongues, 
besides  being  drilled  in  religious  disputation."     Elsewhere 


Wessel  and  the  Reformation  163 

Melanchthon  describes  him  as  a  learned  man  whose 
excellent  writings  require  judgment  on  the  part  of  the 
reader.  Although  there  were  few  at  the  time  with  whom 
he  could  sharpen  his  opinions  by  free  discussion,  yet 
''in  most  matters  he  held  the  same  truths  that  we  are  now 
teaching  after  the  purification  of  the  Church  has  taken 
place."  There  was  much  in  the  mental  attitude  and 
temperament  of  Melanchthon  to  render  the  teaching  and 
spirit  of  Wessel  acceptable  to  him,  and  it  is  worthy  of 
special  notice  that  the  points  of  his  final  divergence  from 
the  positions  of  his  great  colleague  were  mainly  those  on 
which  Luther  differed  from  Wessel.  This  is  but  another 
indication  of  Wessel' s  significance  in  relation  to  the 
origins  of  the  Reformed  as  distinct  from  the  Lutheran 
type  of  Protestantism. 

From  even  such  a  cursory  survey  of  Wessel's  contribu- 
tion to  the  Protestant  movement  two  facts  become  evi- 
dent. Not  only  did  he  render  an  important  service  of 
preparation  in  his  criticism  of  abuses  in  the  doctrines 
and  usages  of  the  Church  and  in  the  encouragement  of  the 
study  of  the  Bible  in  its  original  languages,  but  through 
his  disciples  and  his  writings  he  was  an  influential  factor 
in  the  Reformation  itself.  The  former  fact  has  long  been 
recognized  in  various  quarters.  Bayle  calls  Wessel  "the 
precursor  of  Luther,"  Doedes  quotes  with  approval  the 
statement  of  another  authority  that  he  was  "beyond 
doubt  the  most  prominent  of  all  those  of  the  Germanic 
race  who  prepared  the  way  for  the  Reformation,  and 
stood  nearer  mentally  to  the  Reformers  than  any  other 
man  of  his  generation." 

But  Wessel's  relations  to  the  Reformation  were  not 
merely  those  of  a  precursor.  Indirectly  through  the 
Reformers  whom  he  influenced,  and  directly  by  means 
of  his  writings,  he  became  an  important  factor  in  the 
estabUshment  of  Protestantism.     After  they  began  to  be 


1 64  Wessel  Gansfort 

printed  in  1520,  the  Farrago  and  other  selections  from  his 
works  entered  the  stream  of  Protestant  writings  and  had 
their  part  in  creating  and  confirming  sentiment  favorable 
to  the  Reformation.  The  many  editions  of  the  Farrago 
which  appeared  during  the  third  decade  of  the  sixteenth 
century  indicate  the  demand  that  there  was  for  the  book 
at  the  very  time  when  Protestantism  was  making  its  most 
rapid  progress.  The  further  fact  that  one  of  his  most 
Protestant  treatises  was  translated  and  printed  in  the 
German  language  shows  that  his  influence  was  not  con- 
fined to  clerical  and  academic  circles. 

It  is  hardly  exact  to  speak  of  Wessel  as  in  any  special 
sense  the  precursor  of  Luther.  He  was  rather  the  pre- 
cursor of  all  the  Reformers  except  those  that  ran  off  into 
Anabaptist  extremes.  But  as  between  Luther  and 
Zwingli,  for  example,  Wessel  was  unquestionably  the 
spiritual  father  of  the  latter  rather  than  the  former.  In 
other  words,  it  is  the  Reformed  type  of  Protestantism 
rather  than  the  Lutheran  to  which  the  teachings  and 
spirit  of  Wessel  naturally  lead.  This  is  evident  from 
many  considerations  but  comes  to  impressive  mani- 
festation in  the  matter  of  the  Eucharist,  the  pivotal  point 
in  the  controversy  between  Luther  and  Zwingli  and  their 
followers.  Wessel  emphasized  the  memorial  character 
of  the  Eucharist,  and  by  imphcation  at  least  denied 
the  corporeal  presence  of  Christ  in  the  elements.  It 
was  his  disciple,  Honius,  who  first  asserted  that  the 
word  "is"  in  the  significant  statement,  "This  is  my 
body,"  should  be  understood  to  mean  "signifies."  That 
was  the  point  of  fracture  between  the  two  sections  of 
Protestantism,  and  to  that  point  Wessel's  teachings 
inevitably  lead.  Honius  simply  crystallized  into  one 
definite  statement  the  truth  held  in  suspension  in  all 
Wessel's  teaching  regarding  the  presence  of  Christ  in 
the  Eucharist. 


Wessel  and  the  Reformation  165 

It  was  noticed  above  that  the  essay  on  the  Eucharist 
was  among  the  writings  of  Wessel  that  Rhodius  brought  to 
Luther,  and  that  the  Reformer  approved  of  printing  the 
others  but  demurred  at  the  sentiments  contained  in  this 
essay,  sending  it  to  (Ecolampadius  to  get  his  opinion  of  it. 
A  dramatic  episode  at  Luther's  dinner-table,  reported  by 
Hardenberg,  in  which  Carlstadt  in  the  presence  of  other 
guests  challenged  Luther  to  approve  Wessel's  treatise 
on  the  Eucharist  and  so  come  out  in  clear  opposition 
to  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation,  may  well  be 
regarded  as  marking  Luther's  separation,  not  from 
Carlstadt  alone,  but  from  the  other  Protestant  lead- 
ers in  Germany  and  Switzerland  in  whom  Wessel's 
teachings  on  the  Eucharist  were  to  find  acceptance  and 
advocacy. 

Ten   years   later   at   the   decisive  Marburg  Colloquy,   • 
Luther  found  himself  confronted  with  a  group  of  men 
who  had  been  deeply  influenced  by  Wessel's  writings  or 
disciples  and  who  were  confirmed  in  his  view  of  the  sacra-  \ 
ment  which  was  felt  to  be  central  to  the  faith  and  worship  ! 
of  the  Church.     When  at  the  close  of  the  somewhat  heated  ^ 
discussion   Luther   exclaimed   to   the   Swiss   Reformers: 
"You  have  a  different  spirit  from  us, "  he  expressed  a  fact 
which  did  not  become  fully  apparent  until  the  Lutheran 
and   Reformed   parties   had   matured   their   systems   of 
doctrine  and  types  of  Church  life. 

It  is  also  to  be  noted  that  in  those  centers  where  the 
influence  of  Wessel  or  his  disciples  was  strong,  the  Nether- 
lands, the  Palatinate,  and  the  northern  Swiss  cities, 
though  the  powerful  leadership  of  Luther  may  have  won 
acceptance  for  his  doctrines  at  the  beginning,  yet  when  a 
permanent  form  of  Church  life  and  doctrine  was  to  be 
established,  they  turned  from  Luther  to  the  more  congenial 
type  of  teaching  and  practice  presented  by  Wessel  and  his 
disciples.     It  is  facts  Hke  these  that  have  led  Ullmann  and 


1 66  Wessel  Gansfort 

others  to  regard  Wessel  as  one  of  the  principal  founders 
of  the  Reformed  Churches,  which  Calvin  was  later  to 
provide  with  their  complete  organization  in  doctrine  and 
polity. 


VESSE 


EPISTOLA  ADVERSVS   M. 
Engclbcrtura  Leydcnfcm 

EPISTOLA  M.IacobiHocc Decani 

Naldiccri«ad  M.VvcfTelum. 
Fpiftola  apolcgetica  M.  V  vcfiTeli  aducrfus 
Epifiola  M.fecobi  Hocck. 
Epiftob  M, VvdrcU,quidde  fpfrituum  dC 
mortuorum  apparitioa^us  fit  tenendum. 
ExEpiftoIaloannis  Aemftelredamcfi.  D 
rufiPragijs  &cclebraoofbus(cdm  V  velTdu. 
Epiftola  VvefTch  ad  Dccanu  Traieclefem 
dc  foanne  V velalig  6^  fuo  pcrioilo. 
Impugnatoriu  M.  Antonrj  dcCaftro  ordi 
nis  pdicatOTu  cotra  V  v  efleliim. 


The  Title-page  of  the  Completest  Edition  of  Wessel's  Letters 

There  is  no  indication  of  the  time  or  place  of  its  publication 


CHAPTER  X 

THE  LETTERS 

The  few  letters  of  Wessel  that  we  possess  may  be  said 
to  have  survived  by  accident.  Their  partly  controversial 
character  resulted  in  their  being  affixed  to  the  Farrago 
and  to  at  least  one  other  theological  treatise.  But  no 
two  editions  of  the  Farrago  contain  exactly  the  same 
letters,  nor  is  there  any  explanation  offered  as  to  the 
basis  of  their  selection.  Four  brief  letters  appear  at  the 
very  end  of  the  first  edition  of  the  Farrago.  They  occupy 
but  twelve  pages  and  constitute  the  final  section  in  the 
chapter  on  Purgatory,  being  introduced  by  the  simple 
statement,  "Here  follow  certain  letters  by  the  same 
Doctor."  The  reason  for  their  introduction  is  quite 
obvious;  they  have  more  or  less  bearing  upon  the  future 
life. 

In  a  later  edition  of  the  Farrago,  published  in  Basel  in 
1522,  the  space  occupied  by  the  letters  has  expanded  from 
twelve  pages  to  seventy-two.  To  the  four  original  letters 
seven  others  have  been  added,  one  of  them  thirty-seven 
pages  in  length.  The  letters  are  introduced  by  the  same 
formula  as  before,  and  they  still  follow  the  chapter  on 
Purgatory;  but  their  increased  importance  is  indicated 
by  the  larger  print  of  the  title  and  a  conspicuous  orna- 
mental initial.  Several  of  the  letters  have  also  separate 
page  headings.  In  the  Basel  edition  of  the  following 
year  the  table  of  contents  gives  the  letters  a  place  co- 
ordinate with  the  six  essays  that  compose  the  volume, 

167 


1 68  Wessel  Gansfort 

introducing  them  as  a  seventh  section.  Thus  the  im- 
portance of  the  letters  gradually  won  its  way  to  recogni- 
tion. 

About  the  time  of  the  appearance  of  the  Basel  editions 
of  the  Farrago  there  was  issued  a  little  pamphlet  consisting 
of  seven  of  Wessel's  letters  and  the  Impugnatorium  of  a 
certain  Master  Antonius  de  Castro,  a  long  and  rather 
violent  reply  to  Wessel's  second  letter  to  Jacob  Hoeck. 
The  decorated  title-page  is  shown  herewith.  The  pam- 
phlet gives  no  clue  as  to  the  time  or  place  of  its  pubHcation 
or  the  identity  of  its  publisher.  There  were  issued  from 
the  same  press  and  presumably  at  the  same  time  two  other 
pamphlets  containing  Wessel's  devotional  writings,  De 
Sacramento  Eucharistiae  and  De  Oratione  et  Modo  Orandi. 
Copies  of  these  extremely  rare  volumes  are  to  be  seen  in 
the  PubHc  Library  of  the  city  of  New  York.  They  for- 
merly belonged  to  the  great  English  book  collector, 
Richard  Heber. 

When  in  1614,  nearly  a  century  after  the  appearance  01 
the  first  edition  of  the  Farrago  with  its  four  brief  letters, 
Peter  Pappus  brought  out  at  Groningen  a  complete  edi- 
tion of  Wessel's  surviving  works,  he  added  no  new  letters 
to  those  already  published.  He  merely  took  the  letter  of 
Luther  to  Rhodius  concerning  Wessel,  which  had  stood 
as  an  introduction  to  some  early  editions  of  the  Farrago, 
and  placed  it  with  the  other  letters  in  a  separate  section 
at  the  end  of  the  volume.  He  includes  however  one 
important  letter  that  no  edition  of  the  Farrago  contains. 
It  had  earher  appeared  as  a  prefix  to  the  treatise  on  the 
Eucharist.  It  is  addressed  to  a  nameless  nun  and  con- 
tains advice  regarding  participation  in  the  service  of  the 
mass.  It  is  quite  evident  that  these  letters  were  pre- 
served, not  because  of  the  Hght  that  they  throw  on  the 
personality  of  Wessel,  but  on  account  of  their  incidental 
doctrinal  elements. 


The  Letters  169 

The  first  thing  to  be  noticed  regarding  the  fifteen 
letters,  whose  translation  appears  elsewhere,  is  that  they 
were  not  all  written  by  Wessel.  They  may  be  described 
as  letters  by  and  to  and  about  Wessel.  Nine  of  them, 
however,  are  from  his  own  pen.  Three  are  addressed 
to  him,  one  by  David  of  Burgundy,  another  by  Jacob 
Hoeck,  and  a  third  by  Alexander  Hegius.  Of  the  three 
letters  concerning  Wessel  the  first  was  written  by  Luther 
to  Rhodius,  the  second  by  John  of  Amsterdam  to  Bernard 
of  Meppen,  and  the  third  by  Wessel's  earliest  known 
publisher,  Adam  Petri  of  Basel,  to  Conrad  Faber.  Of  these 
fifteen  letters  two  do  not  appear  in  any  of  the  early 
collections  of  Wessel's  writings;  one  is,  however,  incor- 
porated in  Hardenberg's  sketch  of  Wessel's  life.  They 
are  here  presented  because  of  the  sidelight  that  they  cast 
upon  the  subject  of  our  study.  These  are  the  letters 
written  to  Wessel  by  David  of  Burgundy  and  by  Alexander 
Hegius. 

As  Luther's  letter  concerning  Wessel  stands  first  in  the 
completest  collection  of  letters  that  we  possess  we  may 
well  begin  our  analysis  with  it.  The  letter  was  originally 
addressed  to  Rhodius,  who  with  a  companion  had  brought 
from  the  Netherlands  some  of  Wessel's  writings  to  show 
them  to  Luther  with  a  view  to  their  publication.  These 
writings  consisted  of  the  documents  which  were  issued 
later  with  the  title  Farrago,  a  treatise  on  the  Eucharist, 
and  apparently  a  few  letters.  Luther  read  them  with 
astonishment  and  delight,  and  with  the  exception  of 
the  essay  on  the  Eucharist,  advocated  their  immediate 
publication.  In  this  letter  Luther  in  characteristic 
fashion  expresses  his  gratification  and  encouragement 
in  discovering  that  this  great  scholar  of  the  preceding 
century  had  held  so  many  of  the  views  which  he  was 
engaged  in  defending.  He  characterizes  him  as  "a  rare 
and  great  spirit";  and  concerning  the  agreement  in  their 


170 


Wessel  Gansfort 


understanding  of  the  gospel  he  makes  this  remarkable 
statement:  "If  I  had  read  his  works  earlier,  my  enemies 
might  think  that  Luther  had  absorbed  everything  from 
Wessel!" 

Inasmuch  as  this  letter,  in  the  form  in  which  we  pos- 
sess it,  is  directed  not  to  Rhodius  but  to  "The  Christian 
Reader"  and  closes  with  a  farewell  to  "The  Christian 
Brother"  and  has  other  marks  of  impersonality  in  its 
address,  it  evidently  has  been  altered  somewhat,  doubtless 
with  Luther's  consent,  in  order  to  serve  as  a  foreword  to 
the  Wittenberg  edition  of  the  Farrago.  There  can  be  no 
doubt  that  this  unqualified  indorsement  of  Wessel  by  the 
leader  of  the  Reformation  did  much  to  excite  that  popular 
demand  for  the  Farrago  which  soon  led  to  its  repeated 
publication  in  different  centers. 

The  letter  of  Adam  Petri  in  which  he  dedicates  his 
edition  of  the  Farrago  to  Conrad  Faber  naturally  chal- 
lenges comparison  with  that  of  Luther  to  Rhodius.  They 
were  both  written  during  1522,  and  were  both  intended 
to  commend  the  Farrago  to  the  reader.  Their  lines  of 
thought  cross  at  several  points,  most  notably  in  their  regret 
that  Wessel's  writings  have  hitherto  been  so  little  known. 
Their  explanations  are  the  same,  the  scholastic  theo- 
logians have  found  it  to  their  advantage  to  neglect  or 
ignore  them.  Luther's  chief  commendation  of  the  teach- 
ings of  Wessel  is  that  they  are  so  nearly  identical  with  his 
own;  Petri,  however,  likens  them  to  the  sacred  Scrip- 
tures! Both  claim  for  them  a  species  of  inspiration. 
Luther  commends  the  Farrago  to  "the  pious  reader" 
with  the  caution  that  he  must  read  with  discernment, 
while  Petri  especially  urges  it  upon  the  attention  of  two 
classes  of  readers:  the  theologians  who  have  substituted 
philosophy  for  Christian  truth,  and  neglectful  pastors  who 
need  Wessel's  teachings  and  his  example  of  simple  piety. 
In  Luther's  letter  we  have  a  hint  of  the  impression  that 


The  Letters  171 

Wessel's  writings  made  upon  a  great  creative  mind,  in 
that  of  Petri  we  see  the  enthusiasm  that  they  excited 
in  a  simple  scholar  of  strong  evangelical  sympathies. 

Probably  the  earliest  letter  from  Wessel  that  has 
been  preserved  is  that  addressed  to  Ludolph  van  Veen 
{de  Veno),  "most  worthy  Dean  of  the  celebrated  church 
at  Utrecht  and  Doctor  of  both  Laws."  It  is  a  human 
document  of  extraordinary  interest,  for  it  reflects  the 
feelings  of  a  man  who  faces  the  Inquisition.  It  was 
written  from  Zwolle  on  the  6th  of  April,  1479.  Wessel 
apparently  had  not  yet  withdrawn  from  his  professorship 
at  Heidelberg.  He  was  still  exposed  to  the  attack  of  the 
heresy-hunter.  For  the  immediate  occasion  of  the  letter 
was  the  report  brought  to  him  by  "most  faithful  friends" 
that  when  the  inquisitors  at  Cologne  had  finally  disposed 
of  the  case  of  his  friend,  John  of  Wesel,  then  being  tried 
for  heresy,  they  would  turn  their  attention  to  him.  The 
situation  of  peril  and  the  urgent  tone  of  the  letter  with  its 
three  references  to  death  by  fire  indicate  that  the  writer 
reaHzed  his  danger,  although  he  says:  "I  do  not  fear 
anything  that  I  may  have  to  undergo  for  the  purity  of  the 
truth." 

Ludolph  was  an  intimate  friend  of  Wessel;  they  had 
studied  together  in  Paris.  Apparently  there  was  some 
friendly  compact  between  them  in  the  matter  of  corre- 
spondence. Wessel  was  accustomed,  as  we  learn  from 
a  section  in  the  Farrago,  to  submit  his  theological  views 
to  his  friend's  criticism.  But  besides  being  a  theologian, 
Ludolph  was  an  expert  in  Canon  Law;  and  moreover  he 
had  himself,  in  his  younger  days,  had  experience  with  the 
Inquisition.  So  Wessel  turns  to  him  for  counsel  as  to  how 
he  can  best  defend  himself  from  the  threatened  attack. 
But  though  concerned  for  his  own  safety  he  does  not 
forget  the  misfortunes  of  their  friend,  John  of  Wesel, 
already  condemned  to  the  flames  for  views  much  like  those 


172  Wessel  Gansfort 

that  he  himself  held.  He  laments  that  their  friend  had 
been  so  rash  in  the  statement  of  his  opinions,  that  lacking 
the  rigid  logical  discipline  of  the  Realists  he  had  often 
been  unguarded  in  speech,  and  that  he  had  made  the 
grievous  mistake  of  taking  controversial  matters  into  the 
pulpit  to  the  confusion  of  his  simple  auditors.  But  he 
adds:  "I  cannot  but  love  the  man  and  sympathize  with 
him  in  his  misfortunes."  The  aged  scholar,  over  eighty- 
years  of  age  and  in  broken  health,  escaped  the  flames 
by  the  recantation  of  his  most  offensive  teachings  and  was 
sentenced  to  confinement  in  a  monastery  at  Mainz,  where 
he  died  soon  after. 

While  Wessel  makes  most  urgent  appeal  to  his  friend, 
the  Dean  of  Utrecht,  to  give  him  the  benefit  of  his  knowl- 
edge and  experience  in  defending  himself  in  the  court  of 
the  inquisitor,  yet  he  makes  no  reference  to  the  Bishop 
of  Utrecht,  whose  personal  protection  would  afford  him 
much  greater  safety  than  the  best  legal  advice.  It  is  quite 
probable,  however,  that  this  letter  to  the  Dean  was  partly 
intended  for  the  Bishop,  who  long  before,  as  his  letter  to 
be  noticed  later  indicates,  had  offered  him  protection 
in  case  of  danger  from  theological  adversaries.  In  any 
case,  his  peril  appears  to  have  come  to  the  Bishop's 
knowledge,  for  very  soon  afterwards  Wessel  gave  up  his 
position  at  Heidelberg  where  he  was  exposed  to  the  wrath 
of  the  theologians  at  Cologne  and  established  himself  at 
Groningen  in  the  diocese  and  thus  under  the  immediate 
protection  of  the  powerful  Bishop  of  Utrecht,  with  whom 
until  his  death  he  was  accustomed  to  spend  a  part  of  each 
year  at  his  palace  at  Vollenhove,  north  of  Zwolle. 

Nothing  could  be  sharper  than  the  contrast  between 
the  acute  anxiety  manifest  in  Wessel's  appeal  to  Ludolph 
and  the  atmosphere  of  cloistered  serenity  that  pervades 
the  two  letters  that  follow.  During  the  last  ten  years  of 
his  life  Wessel  spent  a  large  part  of  his  time  in  the  Convent 


The  Letters  173 

of  the  Spiritual  Virgins  at  Groningen,  where  he  rendered 
service,  not  as  a  chaplain,  since  he  was  a  layman,  but  as  a 
revered  and  beloved  spiritual  adviser.  It  was  apparently 
at  the  suggestion  of  the  Bishop  of  Utrecht  that  the  nuns 
offered  an  asylum  to  the  aged  scholar,  who,  whatever  other 
compensation  he  may  have  made  them,  rewarded  them 
for  their  hospitality  and  care  by  religious  instruction  and 
counsel  and  by  composing  prayers  for  their  use,  even  as 
he  wrote  devotional  books  for  the  monks  at  Mount 
Saint  Agnes. 

The  character  of  the  counsel  that  he  gave  to  his  sisters 
of  the  convent  may  be  inferred  from  the  contents  of  his 
two  surviving  letters  to  nuns.  He  was  apparently  a 
familiar  guest  at  other  cloisters  than  that  at  Groningen 
and  was  in  correspondence  with  some  of  their  inmates. 
These  two  letters,  so  full  of  wise  and  tender  counsel, 
disclose  a  most  attractive  side  of  Wessel's  nature,  and  also 
afford  an  interesting  glimpse  into  the  Dutch  cloister  life 
at  the  end  of  the  fifteenth  century. 

The  charming  letter  to  Gertrude  Reyniers  of  the  convent 
of  Claras  Aquas  was  written  in  reply  to  several  practical 
questions  that  she  had  asked  him.  The  first  of  these  was  in 
relation  to  certain  ghost  stories  which  were  current  in  her 
region.  How  much  credence  should  she  give  them,  and 
how  far  should  revelations  by  those  who  were  reported 
to  have  returned  from  the  dead  affect  our  conceptions  of 
the  future  life?  There  is  no  more  reason  to  suppose 
that  Wessel  believed  in  ghosts  than  the  theologians  of 
to-day,  but  he  tactfully  avoids  ridiculing  the  nun's  anxiety 
over  the  stories  that  she  had  heard  and  turns  her  attention 
to  what  the  Scriptures  say  about  the  future  life  and  the 
small  place  they  have  for  such  phenomena  as  ghosts  and 
visions  and  excursions  into  the  underworld.  All  tales 
regarding  these  matters  are  to  be  taken  with  a  large 
grain  of  salt!    When  one  recalls  how  prominent  a  part 


174  Wessel  Gansfort 

visions  and  other  trance-phenomena  had  played  in  the 
cloister  life  of  the  Middle  Ages  he  realizes  how  adroit 
yet  firm  was  Wessel's  handling  of  a  very  delicate  matter. 
Many  a  convent  had  had  its  origin  in  an  ecstatic  vision 
vouchsafed  to  some  pious  maiden.  Wessel,  however, 
even  ventures  to  imply  that  visions  may  be  merely  a  wile 
of  the  devil! 

In  her  second  question  the  nun  introduces  a  matter 
on  which  a  man  could  speak  with  greater  positiveness  in 
the  fifteenth  century  than  would  be  advisable  to-day. 
Should  a  woman  study  logic?  The  question  means 
more  than  it  seems  to,  inasmuch  as  logic  was  the  pre- 
liminary discipline  to  philosophy  and  theology,  and  was 
the  first  step  in  university  training.  It  amounted  to 
<^this:  Should  a  nun  aspire  to  higher  education?  Wessel 
1^  thought  not.  We  need  not  assume  that  he  would  have 
discouraged  the  intellectual  aspirations  of  all  women,  but 
recalling  perhaps  the  futile  hair-splitting  of  the  university 
logicians  and  the  wrangling  of  the  theologians,  he  con- 
cludes that  for  a  nun  "  the  highest  logic  consists  in  love  and 
prayer,"  That  is  her  surest  path  to  truth.  On  the  other 
hand,  he  encourages  her  in  the  study  of  literature,  believ- 
ing that  it  will  contribute  not  only  to  the  broadening  of 
her  mind  but  also  to  the  hastening  of  her  union  of  love 
with  her  Divine  Bridegroom.  "No  one,"  he  adds,  "really 
lives  who  does  not  love."  The  impatience  of  his  messen- 
ger causes  him  to  end  the  letter  rather  abruptly  with  a 
greeting  to  the  Mother  Superior  of  Clarae  Aquae. 

It  is  impossible  to  ascertain  the  name  or  location  of  the 
nun  to  whom  the  second  letter  is  written.  If,  as  seems 
altogether  probable,  the  preservation  of  the  first  letter 
was  due  to  its  teaching  concerning  the  future  life  which 
in  a  remote  way  connected  it  with  De  Purgatorio  to  which 
it  was  appended,  the  preservation  of  this  letter  is  clearly 
attributable  to  its  teaching  regarding  the  Eucharist  since 


The  Letters  175 

it  is  found  in  none  of  the  collections  of  Wessel's  letters 
and  appears  only  as  a  kind  of  epistolatory  introduction 
to  the  treatise,  De  Sacramento  Eucharistiae. 

The  nun  to  whom  this  letter  was  addressed  had  evi- 
dently written  Wessel  that  she  was  willing  to  undergo 
any  severity  of  bodily  discipline  in  order  to  commend 
herself  to  Christ.  He  praises  her  devotion  but  warns  her 
against  the  self-righteous  complacency  into  which  many 
fall.  She  must  not  deceive  herself  with  the  notion  that 
she  can  commend  herself  to  God  by  suffering  or  sacrifice, 
or  by  daily  confession  or  communion.  She  must  humbly 
accept  the  righteousness  of  Christ.  Like  Mary  who  sat 
at  her  Master's  feet  and  listened  to  his  words  in  intent 
devotion,  she  too  will  attain  purity  of  heart  not  by  severe 
fasts  nor  the  wearing  of  a  rough  garment  nor  by  any 
other  austerity,  but  rather  by  "  quiet  longing,  sweet  tears, 
and  kisses  on  the  feet  of  Jesus."  It  will  be  sufficient 
bodily  discipline  for  her  if  she  simply  discharges  the  tasks 
appointed  her  in  the  cloister. 

As  for  participation  in  the  Eucharist,  Wessel  does  not 
disparage  its  value  to  her,  but  implies  that  it  is  more  im- 
portant that  she  feed  on  Christ  by  earnest  loving  medita- 
tion upon  him.  This  he  had  written  her  in  an  earlier  letter, 
and  now  he  adds:  "I  assure  you  that  if  only  with  pious 
intention  you  muse  upon  your  lover  and  betrothed  who 
was  given  for  your  salvation,  you  not  only  embrace  him, 
but  since  he  dwells  in  the  banquet-room  of  your  heart,  you 
eat  his  flesh  and  drink  his  blood."  This  statement  is 
characteristic  of  Wessel's  conception  of  the  sacraments; 
he  penetrates  to  the  spiritual  reality  which  the  form 
embodies.  Elsewhere  he  intimates  that  the  Eucharist 
can  be  celebrated  without  any  material  elements  what- 
ever, through  a  purely  spiritual  participation,  like  that  of 
the  Quakers. 

The  four  letters  that  follow  constitute  a  distinct  group. 


176  VVessel  Gansfort 

They  deal  with  a  single  subject,  the  state  of  the  dead  and 
the  proper  character  of  our  prayers  for  them.  Three  of 
the  letters  are  addressed  by  Wessel  to  monastic  friends  of 
his  who  were  also  friends  of  one  another.  The  last  letter 
of  the  group,  written,  after  Wessel's  death,  by  one  of  these 
correspondents  to  another,  relates  to  their  departed  mas- 
ter's teachings  concerning  the  future  life.  These  friendly 
letters  passing  by  messenger  from  one  monastery  to 
another  give  us  a  glimpse  of  the  serious  and  noble  char- 
acter of  the  cloister  life  that  existed  in  the  northern  Nether- 
lands at  the  time.  They  also  indicate  the  eagerness  of 
the  monks,  even  those  of  high  rank,  to  receive  instruction 
from  Wessel. 

It  is  indicative  of  the  careless  editing  of  Wessel's  writings 
that  in  none  of  the  editions  of  his  works  do  the  members 
of  this  group  stand  in  their  proper  order,  an  order  not 
difficult  to  determine  from  internal  evidence.  Nor  has 
any  editor  identified  the  anonymous  recipient  of  the  third 
letter,  "a  certain  man,"  with  the  chaplain  at  Adwerd, 
though  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  letter  was  addressed 
to  him  in  acceptance  of  his  good-natured  challenge. 
Bernard  of  Meppen  to  whom  the  first  letter  of  the  group 
is  addressed  was  a  canon  regular  and  later  procurator  of 
the  monastery  at  Zila.  He  was  evidently  an  intimate 
friend  of  Wessel  and  counted  himself  one  of  his  disciples. 
This  letter,  which  has  lost  both  beginning  and  conclusion, 
was  apparently  a  reply  to  one  in  which  he  had  asked  a 
number  of  questions  regarding  the  state  of  the  dead  and 
our  duty  of  prayer  on  their  behalf.  These  questions 
Wessel  proceeds  to  answer  in  a  very  characteristic  fashion. 
The  argument  advances  in  a  series  of  pictures  that  blend 
each  into  the  next  in  a  way  that  makes  the  progress 
of  his  thought  rather  difficult  to  follow  even  for  one  who 
is  familiar  with  the  biblical  imagery  in  which  his  ideas 
are  clothed.     His  line  of  thought  may  be  sumimarized 


The  Letters  i77 

thus:  The  religious  life  begins  when  the  impulse  of  love 
to  Christ  moves  our  hearts.  That  love  as  it  increases 
in  this  life  purifies  our  natures;  in  the  future  life,  in  the 
very  presence  of  Christ,  that  purification  is  completed 
and  the  soul  is  brought  into  perfect  conformity  with  the 
will  of  God.  But  even  the  day  of  heaven  dawns  gradually 
and  heavenly  perfection  is  not  achieved  at  once.  Though 
we  have  no  sin  in  that  blissful  life,  our  love  for  Christ 
being  imperfect  is  subject  to  growth.  We  are  accepted 
as  spotless  and  perfect,  but  we  are  still  wayfarers  journey- 
ing toward  more  perfect  love  and  obedience. 

Hence,  we  may  well  desire  and  pray  that  our  departed 
friends  should  make  progress  in  the  heavenly  life.  The 
dead  desire  that  for  themselves,  the  angels  desire  it  for 
them.  But  it  is  quite  another  thing  to  pray  that  they  be 
delivered  from  their  sins.  That  involves  a  wrong  concep- 
tion of  the  state  in  which  the  blessed  dead  exist.  They' 
are  already  freed  from  their  sins  and  accepted  by  Christ  as 
spotless,  though  they  are  still  wayfarers  on  the  road  to 
perfect  love.  This  was,  of  course,  a  tacit  rejection  of  the" 
whole  theory  of  purgatory,  as  a  place  of  cleansing  suffering 
for  sin.  So  much  superstition  had  become  connected  with 
the  custom  of  prayers  for  the  dead  that  Wessel  declared 
that  he  did  not  desire  that  anyone  should  pray  for  him 
after  his  death! 

His  brief  letter  to  John  of  Amsterdam,  abbot  of  Adwerd, 
is  unfortunately  the  only  one  that  we  possess  of  the  many 
that  passed  between  these  intimate  friends.  Their  cor- 
respondence continued  till  Wessel's  death  and  there- 
after his  letters  were  treasured  and  consulted  by  the 
brothers  at  Adwerd.  The  greeting  in  this  letter  is  most 
affectionate  and  its  whole  tone  that  of  intimate  friendship. 
It  was  written  from  Mount  Saint  Agnes  near  Zwolle,  and 
contains  a  reference  to  other  letters  that  had  passed 
between  them  and  an  invitation  to  come  to  him  and 

VOL.  I — 13 


178  Wessel  Gansfort 

continue  their  discussions.  The  immediate  occasion  of 
the  letter  was  to  call  the  attention  of  its  recipient  to 
a  much  longer  letter  being  sent  by  the  same  messenger, 
Henry,  to  the  chaplain  at  Adwerd.  By  way  of  friendly 
challenge  the  chaplain  had  sent  word  to  Wessel  that  if 
he  but  had  a  chance  to  discuss  matters  with  him  he  could 
cure  him  of  his  peculiar  notions  concerning  the  future 
Hfe. 

The  long  letter  that  follows  is  Wessel's  reply  to  the 
challenge  of  the  chaplain,  who  it  intimates  is  already  well 
acquainted  with  his  views,  as  is  also  the  lord  abbot,  who 
will  sit  as  umpire  in  the  discussion.  The  argument  of  the 
letter  is  a  rather  simple  one:  According  to  their  own 
testimony  the  apostles  were  conscious  of  imperfection. 
Neither  they  nor  anyone  else  can  in  this  life  be  addressed 
in  the  terms  in  which  in  Canticles  the  Bridegroom  ad- 
dresses the  Bride.  It  is  only  in  the  future  life  that  such 
words  are  applicable  to  the  Church,  and  even  there,  not 
at  first,  for  the  blessed  do  not  at  once  attain  to  perfec- 
tion. It  is  only  by  the  gradual  purification  of  love  in  pur- 
gatory— that  is  to  say  in  paradise — that  the  redeemed  soul 
progresses  to  the  perfection  of  heaven.  In  this  state  of 
progress  the  cultivation  of  love  for  the  brethren  and  for 
the  Elder  Brother  prepares  the  blessed  for  the  perfect  love 
of  God. 

That  this  letter,  as  well  as  the  one  before  it,  should  have 
been  attached  to  the  treatise  on  purgatory  in  the  early 
editions  of  the,  Farrago  is  not  surprising.  They  both 
assail  the  current  notion  of  purgatory  as  a  place  of  suffer- 
ing for  sin.  Moreover,  by  affirming  that  even  the  apostles 
and  saints  went  into  the  other  life  imperfect,  they  deny 
the  possibility  of  their  merits  becoming  a  treasury  of 
good  works  on  the  basis  of  which  indulgences  could  be 
granted  to  the  morally  delinquent. 

The  last  letter  in  this  group  has  a  pathetic  interest  in 


The  Letters  179 

that  it  is  a  witness  to  the  reverent  esteem  in  which  even 
after  his  death  the  teachings  of  Wessel  were  held  by  his 
friends.  It  was  written  by  John  of  Amsterdam,  abbot  of 
Adwerd,  to  Bernard  of  Meppen,  procurator  of  Zila,  and 
relates  to  the  matter  of  prayers  and  masses  for  the  dead — 
a  subject  on  which,  as  we  have  seen,  Wessel,  who  is  re- 
ferred to  as  "Our  Master,"  had  written  to  each  of  them. 
They  do  not  venture  to  advance  views  of  their  own ;  they 
are  concerned  only  to  ascertain  what  Wessel  had  taught 
concerning  it.  And  for  that  purpose  John  sends  his  friend 
a  list  of  propositions  by  Wessel,  recommending  him  to 
read  them  again  and  again  since  they  do  not  yield  their 
full  meaning  at  a  single  reading.  From  these  propositions 
the  writer  ventures  to  make  two  cautious  deductions. 
The  letter,  as  its  title  indicates,  is  incomplete. 

The  following  group  of  four  letters,  though  involving 
three  different  persons,  is  in  a  certain  sense  a  literary 
unit,  since  they  revolve  about  the  one  subject  of  indul- 
gences. The  first  brief  one  was  written  by  Wessel  to 
Jacob  Hoeck,  dean  of  Naeldwick,  a  scholarly  man  of  some 
prominence  as  a  theologian.  He  and  Wessel  had  appar- 
ently been  students  together  at  Paris  years  before  and 
had  corresponded  somewhat  in  the  years  that  had  fol- 
lowed. Wessel  states  that  he  has  written  his  friend 
once  each  year  for  the  last  four  years  and  has  also  sent  him 
for  criticism  a  series  of  propositions  concerning  indul- 
gences. Hoeck  had  promised  to  reply  but  had  failed  to 
do  so.  He  was  a  busy  man  and  very  probably  regarded 
Wessel's  controversial  epistles  as  something  of  an  annoy- 
ance. The  immediate  occasion  of  this  letter  was  to  offer 
a  gentle  rebuke  to  Hoeck  for  having  written  to  Cologne, 
presumably  to  the  officers  of  the  Inquisition  there,  calling 
attention  to  some  of  Wessel's  teachings.  For  this  he 
does  not  censure  him  but  merely  intimates  that  he  should 
have  first  privately  shown  him  his  fault,  reminding  him  of 


i8o  Wessel  Gansfort 

the  course  that  our  Lord  had  recommended  in  dealing  with 
an  erring  brother.  He  admits  that  some  of  his  views  are 
unusual,  but  he  cannot  refrain  from  holding  them  since 
"they  have  their  origin  in  faith  and  in  the  Sacred  Page." 
The  truth  will  be  brought  to  light  through  earnest  dis- 
cussion, and  such  discussion  need  not  alienate  friends, 
since  his  own  many  university  disputations  had  not 
cost  him  the  good  will  of  his  opponents. 

The  next  letter  of  the  group,  written  by  Wessel  from 
Pancratium  in  reply  to  one  from  Master  Engelbert  of 
Ley  den,  was  apparently  one  of  many  that  passed  between 
these  eager  controversiaHsts.  Wessel  and  Engelbert 
were  both  friends  of  Jacob  Hoeck,  the  latter  having  been 
his  preceptor.  Engelbert  had  recently  written  Wessel 
taking  him  sharply  to  task  for  his  conceit  and  his  pre- 
sumptuous attempts  to  solve  problems  beyond  his  under- 
standing. To  his  rather  severe  strictures  Wessel  makes 
the  reply  courteous,  though  there  is  a  certain  sting  of 
sarcasm  even  in  his  formal  courtesy.  He  meets  Engel- 
bert's  arguments  in  support  of  indulgences  with  the  line  of 
reasoning  that  is  elaborated  more  fully  in  the  Farrago. 
In  fact,  an  excerpt  from  this  letter  forms  the  first  section 
in  the  essay  on  Penance  and  the  Keys  of  the  Church. 
Llis  argument  may  be  thus  summarized:  The  power  of 
binding  and  loosing  possessed  by  the  apostles  was  used 
"in  the  exercise  of  their  ministry,  not  of  their  authority." 
Neither  they  nor  their  successors  had  any  right  to  impose 
penalties  on  account  of  sins  which  God  had  freely  forgiven. 
That  the  Church  has  done  this  is  no  proof  that  it  is  right, 
for  grave  errors  have  crept  into  her  usages  and  wolves 
have  usurped  the  place  of  her  shepherds.  Some  of  her 
popes  even  have  been  perjurers.  God  is  the  only  one 
who  knows  the  heart,  and  He  alone  can  bestow  forgive- 
ness and  grant  indulgence.  But  plenary  indulgence  God 
grants  to  no  one  in  this  life,  since  no  one  is  absolutely 


The  Letters  i8i 

sinless.  But  if  God  does  not  grant  such  indulgence  how 
can  the  pope?  Wessel  concludes  the  letter  with  the 
suggestion  that  Engelbert  discuss  its  contents  with  Hoeck 
and  reply  upon  his  advice.  He  also  expresses  the  hope 
that  the  dean  himself  will  sometime  deign  to  answer  his 
many  letters — a  hope  which  was  soon  to  be  fulfilled. 

For  the  following  letter  is  the  long-expected  one  from 
Jacob  Hoeck.  In  the  greeting  the  writer  uses  the  Latinized 
form  of  his  Dutch  name  and  signs  himself  Jacobus  Angu- 
laris.  He  gives  as  his  reason  for  not  having  written 
sooner  the  pressure  of  business  and  the  lack  of  a  messenger. 
The  real  reason  comes  out  later:  he  was  "horrified"  at 
the  boldness  of  some  of  Wessel's  ideas.  It  was  in  such 
a  mood,  doubtless,  that  he  had  called  the  attention  of  the 
champions  of  orthodoxy  at  Cologne  to  Wessel's  teachings. 
The  tone  of  his  letter  is,  on  the  whole,  friendly.  He  refers 
good  naturedly  to  Wessel's  deserved  title,  "Master  of 
Contradictions,"  and  modestly  disclaims  any  expectation 
of  making  an  impression  with  arguments  "  upon  that  hard, 
impenetrable,  undaunted  head  of  yours,  which  will  yield 
neither  to  the  hammer  of  common  belief  nor  to  the  sword 
of  ancient  patristic  authority." 

Nevertheless,  Hoeck  proceeds  to  present  the  accepted 
teaching  of  the  Church  concerning  tradition  and  indul- 
gences, summoning  such  authority  as  he  deems  best  and 
making  some  personal  interpretations  and  qualifications. 
He  admits  that  he  is  a  conservative,  distrustful  of  new 
views  and  content  with  the  authority  of  the  Church,  and 
adds:  "You  know  that  there  are  many  doctrines  which 
one  must  believe  under  penalty  of  fire  no  less  than  those 
which  are  contained  in  the  rule  of  faith."  He  squarely 
opposes  Wessel's  views  on  indulgences,  already  set  forth 
in  his  letters  and  propositions,  saying  that  he  firmly 
believes  that  "the  pope  can  decree,  not  only  an  hour,  but 
many  years  of  indulgences,  indeed  even  plenary  indul- 


1 82  Wessel  Gansfort 

gence."  His  own  view  of  indulgences,  which  he  proceeds 
to  give  at  some  length,  is  of  great  interest  as  the  statement 
of  a  cultivated  practical  churchman  of  the  fifteenth  cen- 
tury, concerned  to  keep  within  the  bounds  of  orthodoxy 
and  yet  disclaiming  the  irrational  and  immoral  excesses 
to  which  the  doctrine  and  practice  of  indulgences  were 
subject.  Especially  adroit  is  his  quotation  of  Scripture, 
to  whose  authority  he  knew  that  Wessel  would  unhesitat- 
ingly yield,  and  his  citations  from  Augustine  and  Gerson, 
whom  Wessel  accounted  the  soundest  of  theologians. 
It  is,  however,  the  abjectly  obedient  subject  of  the  Church 
that  speaks  in  statements  Hke  these:  "You  ought  to 
regard  as  a  strong  reason — nay,  as  stronger  than  reason — 
the  authority  of  the  pope  supported  by  that  of  the  prelates 
and  the  doctors,"  and  "If  you  thus  exalt  the  Church  of 
our  pilgrimage  you  need  not  fear  that  you  will  blaspheme 
the  King  or  give  offense  to  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven." 
The  Dean  closes  his  letter  with  an  apology  for  its  in- 
adequacy, due,  he  intimates,  to  his  lack  of  leisure  and 
many  interruptions.  He  requests  a  prompt  reply  and 
promises  a  continuation  of  the  discussion  which  he  hopes 
may  result  in  a  better  mutual  understanding  and  a  clearer 
definition  of  the  truth. 

In  less  than  two  months  Wessel  had  written  and  for- 
warded his  reply.  It  is  a  very  long  letter,  longer  by  half 
than  Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  In  the  Groningen 
edition,  the  compact  Latin  original  occupies  thirty  pages. 
Yet  it  is  a  letter,  not  a  mere  treatise,  though  for  conven- 
ience of  reference  the  editor  has  seen  fit  to  divide  it  into 
chapters.  It  is  intensely  personal  and  consists  largely 
of  replies  to  the  arguments  that  Hoeck  had  advanced  in 
his  letter.  As  it  deals  chiefly  with  the  vexed  question  of 
indulgences,  it  must  be  accounted  one  of  the  most  impor- 
tant of  Wessel's  controversial  writings.  Extended  excerpts 
from  it  appear  in  two  of  the  main  divisions  of  the  Farrago, 


The  Letters  183 

and  inasmuch  as  It  is  a  continuous  treatment  it  affords 
us  our  best  example  of  Wessel's  method  in  controversy. 
/  While  the  letter  begins  and  ends  with  emphatic  pro- 
testations of  respect  and  affection  and  contains  many 
gracious  compliments,  yet  its  tone  is  at  times  rather  sar- 
castic, and  the  remorselessness  with  which  it  follows  up  an 
advantage  in  the  argument  hints  the  reason  for  Wessel's 
having  been  so  dreaded  an  antagonist  in  debate.  It  must 
be  admitted  that  the  letter  could  not  have  been  very 
agreeable  reading  for  the  Dean,  and  he  can  be  excused 
for  not  having  answered  it.  It  was  in  a  sense  un- 
answerable. 

There  are  some  very  interesting  autobiographical 
allusions  in  the  letter,  and  references  to  theological  writers 
evidently  highly  regarded  at  the  time  but  now  wholly 
forgotten.  Its  argument  is  too  long  and  too  complicated 
to  be  reproduced  even  in  outline.  It  is  substantially 
that  which  appears  in  the  sections  of  the  Farrago  which 
relate  to  indulgences,  but  it  is  here  presented  with  much 
greater  consecutiveness  and  cogency.  Especially  skillful 
is  the  selection  of  passages  from  Gerson,  whom  Hoeck 
had  quoted,  which  show  that  indulgences  had  been 
assailed  by  that  much  venerated  author;  and  equally 
adroit  is  the  retort  to  Hoeck's  statement  that  the  "common 
belief"  is  opposed  to  his  views,  in  which  he  shows  that 
there  has  been  such  a  variety  of  teaching  and  practice 
in  relation  to  indulgences  that  no  common  belief  can  be 
said  to  exist.  No  less  ingenious  is  his  declaration  that 
the  first  and  only  plenary  indulgence  was  granted  by 
Saint  Peter.  That  Wessel  did  not  deny  the  value  of 
tradition,  though  he  insists  most  emphatically  upon  the 
Scriptures  as  the  supreme  authority  in  matters  religious, 
is  evident  from  this  concession:  "I  know  that  certain 
things  which  were  not  written  [in  the  New  Testament] 
were  handed  down  to  us  through  the  apostles,  and  that 


1 84  Wessel  Gansfort 

these  traditions  are  to  be  accepted  like  the  canonical 
Scriptures  in  the  rule  of  faith."  The  Scripture  and  apos- 
tolic tradition  and  what  is  necessarily  deduced  from  them 
one  must  believe.  And  there  are  other  things,  which 
obviously  foster  piety,  which  one  need  not  reject.  But 
these  concessions  are  followed  by  a  rigid  investigation  of 
certain  alleged  apostolic  traditions  regarding  indulgences, 
indicating  that  he  was  unwilHng  to  accept  the  dicta  of  the 
popes  as  to  what  traditions  were  apostolic.  And  as  regards 
usages,  he  is  willing  to  admit  only  those  which  can  be 
shown  to  have  been  "handed  down  by  Christ's  apostles 
and  to  have  descended  to  us  through  continuous  observance 
by  the  Fathers."  To  the  statement  of  Augustine,  quoted 
by  Hoeck,  that  he  would  not  believe  the  gospel  if  he  had 
not  believed  the  Church,  he  replies  that  this  declaration 
had  reference  only  to  the  beginnings  of  Augustine's  belief. 
It  was  through  the  Church  that  he  came  to  the  knowledge 
and  acceptance  of  the  gospel.  The  explanation  is  not 
altogether  convincing,  but  it  reveals  clearly  Wessel's 
sharp  limitation  upon  the  authority  of  the  Church.  His 
belief  that  the  blessings  of  the  sacraments  are  ob- 
tainable by  those  who  have  only  a  minimum  of  faith 
is  in  full  accord  with  what  may  be  called  his  religious 
optimism.  He  says:  "No  one  doubts  that  the  effect 
of  the  sacrament  follows  if  the  recipient  opposes  no 
obstacle." 

One  of  the  many  interesting  digressions  from  the  main 
line  of  the  argument  is  that  in  which  he  defends  the 
rigidly  logical  method  and  fine-spun  distinctions  of  the 
scholastics,  insisting  that  while  in  sermons  to  the  people 
the  truth  should  be  presented  in  a  less  studied  and  formal 
fashion,  yet  "theologians  must  have  recourse  to  logic." 
The  inconsistencies  of  Gerson's  teaching  in  reference  to 
indulgences  he  attributes  to  his  lack  of  logical  precision. 
In  the  latter  part  of  the  letter  he  elaborates  a  favorite 


The  Letters  185 

idea,  an  interpretation,  doubtless,  of  the  statement  in  the 
Proverbs  that  "the  path  of  the  righteous  is  as  the  Hght 
of  dawn,  that  shineth  more  and  more  unto  the  perfect 
day."  In  this  life  we  live  in  darkness  illuminated 
only  as  by  a  lamp;  at  death  "we  exchange  the  light  of 
the  lamp  for  that  of  the  day-star";  in  paradise  with 
the  gradual  perfection  of  love  the  day-star  pales  into  the 
dawn  and  that  brightens  into  the  sunrise ;  then  comes  the 
perfect  day  of  the  blessedness  of  God.  This  gradual 
perfection  of  the  soul  in  paradise  is  likened  also  to  the 
preparation  of  a  betrothed  bride  for  the  marriage  chamber. 
But  if  the  pope  had  the  power  to  grant  plenary  indulgence, 
he  might  usher  impure  and  unfit  souls  into  the  presence 
of  the  Heavenly  Bridegroom!  The  letter  leaves  one  with 
the  feeling  that  so  far  as  the  conditions  of  the  forgiveness 
of  sin  and  the  perfection  of  character  are  concerned  Wessel 
had  penetrated  to  the  heart  of  the  matter  and  stood 
firmly  on  the  evangelical  ground  that  faith  and  repentance 
secure  the  free  remission  of  sin  and  that  sanctification 
follows  as  grateful  love  burns  out  the  impurities  of  the 
heart.  Only  those  who  love  plenarily  can  receive  plenary 
indulgence.  "  No  confession  removes  sin  unless  it  renders 
one  dutiful  through  love." 

Two  letters  to  Wessel  are  appended,  although  they  do 
not  appear  in  any  of  the  collections  noticed  above.  The 
one  from  the  Bishop  of  Utrecht  was  written  in  1473, 
about  the  time  that  Wessel  found  it  advisable  to  leave 
Paris  for  the  freer  atmosphere  of  Basel.  It  is  a  charming 
expression  of  friendship  and  generous  appreciation  and 
desire  for  the  renewal  of  companionship.  It  contains 
also  the  offer  of  protection  from  those  who  were  endeavor- 
ing to  accomplish  Wessel's  ruin,  an  offer  which  he  later 
accepted  when  the  theologians  at  Cologne  threatened  him 
with  the  Inquisition.  Hardenberg  informs  us  that  the 
sisters  in  the  convent  at  Groningen  possessed  in  his  day  a 


1 86  Wessel  Gansfort 

collection  of  letters  addressed  by  this  Bishop  of  Utrecht 
to  Wessel. 

The  letter  from  Alexander  Hegius,  distinguished  Hu- 
manist and  Master  of  the  great  school  at  Deventer,  affords 
a  glimpse  of  the  relation  that  Wessel  sustained  to  some  of 
the  leading  educators  of  his  day.  Hegius  writes  as  a 
reverent  pupil  to  his  honored  master.  He  offers  to  share 
with  him  the  use  of  some  rare  books  by  ancient  authors 
which  he  has  recently  obtained  on  a  visit  to  the  famous 
library  founded  by  Cardinal  Nicolas  of  Cusa.  He 
expresses  a  desire  to  borrow  Wessel's  copy  of  the  gospels 
in  Greek.  Replying  to  an  inquiry  as  to  the  method  of 
instruction  which  he  had  introduced  at  Deventer,  he 
assures  Wessel  that  he  had  followed  his  advice  in  the 
matter,  and  would  welcome  further  counsel  from  him. 


VESSE 

LVS 

DE   SACRAMENTO   EVGHA 
tiRidCt  Ec  audicnda  F^iOfai 


The  Title-page  of  the  Essay  on  the  Eucharist 

There  is  no  indication  of  the  time  or  place  of  its  piihlication 


CHAPTER  XI 

THE  TREATISE  ON  THE  EUCHARIST 

The  introduction  of  this  work  to  the  notice  of  the 
Reformers  is  graphically  related  by  Hardenberg  in  his 
sketch  of  the  life  of  Wessel.  Admirers  of  his  had  found 
it  with  other  writings  of  his  among  the  papers  left  by  his 
friend  and  correspondent,  Jacob  Hoeck,  dean  of  Naeldwick. 
The  document's  appearance  of  age  had  raised  doubts  in 
some  minds  as  to  its  authorship,  though  it  was  obvious 
that  the.  views  which  it  presented  were  similar  to  those 
that  Wessel  had  held  and  taught.  Hence  Cornelius"^ 
Honius  and  other  Netherlanders  interested  in  Wessel's 
teachings  included  it  in  the  small  group  of  his  writings 
which  they  sent  to  Luther  and  the  Swiss  Reformers  by 
Rhodius.  It  would  seem  that  these  Dutch  scholars 
were  more  concerned  to  secure  Luther's  approval  of  the 
doctrine  set  forth  in  the  essay  on  the  Eucharist  than  his 
endorsement  of  the  teachings  contained  in  the  other 
documents  which  were  brought  to  Wittenberg.  Harden- 
berg informs  us  that  when  Rhodius  presented  the  essay 
to  Luther  he  requested  him,  in  his  own  name  and  that  of 
others,  to  grant  it  his  acceptance  and  public  approval. 
This  Luther  declined  to  do,  apparently  from  fear  that 
the  radical  doctrines  contained  in  the  essay  might  impair 
the  sanctity  of  the  sacrament  of  the  altar.  Five  years 
later,  however,  he  is  reported  to  have  said  that  if  he  had 
earlier  been  convinced  that  there  was  nothing  in  the 
elements  of  the  sacrament  but  bread  and  wine,  he  would 

-187 


i88  Wessel  Gansfort 

have  been  rendered  a  very  great  service,  for  he  would 
thereby  have  been  spared  many  labors  and  sorrows  and 
enabled  also  to  deal  the  severest  possible  blow  at  the 
papacy. 

Hardenberg  relates  a  dramatic  episode  that  occurred 
at  Luther's  table,  in  which  Dr.  Carlstadt,  one  of  several 
guests,  after  having  failed  in  the  effort  to  persuade  Luther 
to  adopt  and  defend  the  view  of  the  Eucharist  presented 
in  Wessel's  essay,  was  challenged  by  his  host  to  undertake 
the  defense  of  it  himself.  His  acceptance  of  the  challenge 
marked  the  beginning  of  his  alienation  from  his  great 
colleague,  and  marked  the  beginnings  also  of  those 
controversies  which  ultimately  divided  the  Protestant 
movement.  Luther,  however,  wrote  for  Rhodius  a  letter 
to  QEcolampadius  requesting  him  to  read  and  give  his 
opinion  of  the  treatise  on  the  Eucharist,  and  urging  him 
to  have  Wessel's  writings  published  at  Basel.  (Ecolampa- 
dius  did  not  care  to  enter  into  controversy  with  Luther 
and  so  recommended  that  the  document  be  shown  to 
Zwingli,  whose  prompt  approval  of  its  positions  he  after- 
ward followed. 

It  is  perhaps  impossible  to  determine  when  or  where 
or  by  whose  authority  the  treatise  on  the  Eucharist  was 
first  published.  There  were  many  who  were  concerned 
to  give  publicity  to  its  conception  of  the  sacrament  and  it 
probably  appeared  soon  after  it  fell  into  the  hands  of 
Zwingli.  It  has  its  place,  of  course,  in  the  complete 
Groningen  edition  of  Wessel's  writings,  but  it  is  also 
still  to  be  found  as  a  separate  booklet,  issued  evidently 
by  the  same  press  that  brought  out  separately  the  treatise 
on  Prayer  and  the  Letters.  The  type  decorations,  paper, 
and  general  make-up  of  these  three  little  pamphlets  are 
identical  and  they  were  all  issued  without  any  indication 
as  to  publisher,  date,  or  place. 

Prefixed  to  the  treatise  on  the  Eucharist,  as  a  kind  of 


The  Treatise  on  the  Eucharist  189 

epistolatory  introduction,  is  a  beautiful  letter  written  by 
Wessel  to  a  nameless  nun,  whom  he  addresses  simply  as 
"My  sweetest  sister  in  Christ."  It  appears  in  one  of  the 
collections  of  his  letters,  and  was  attached  to  this  treatise, 
because  the  conception  of  the  Eucharist  presented  in  them 
IS  the  same.  Instead  of  encouraging  the  nun  to  go  fre- 
quently to  confession  and  communion,  he  recommends  her 
"to  reflection  and  meditation  upon  the  Lord  Jesus." 
That  he  did  not  hesitate  to  commend  to  individuals  the 
highly  spiritualized  conception  of  the  sacrament  that 
he  presents  in  his  treatise  on  the  subject  is  evident  from 
the  following:  "I  would  assure  you  that  if  with  pious 
intention  you  muse  upon  your  Lover  and  Betrothed,  you 
have  eaten  his  flesh  and  drunk  his  blood." 

It  was  noticed  above  that  there  was  some  doubt  in 
Hardenberg's  time  as  to  the  authorship  of  the  treatise. 
He  describes  it  as  "an  ancient  document,"  and  states 
that  there  was  a  story  current  to  the  effect  that  it  passed 
through  many  hands  and  so  could  hardly  have  been 
written  by  Wessel.  As  to  the  credibility  of  this  story  he 
is  non-committal,  though  he  apparently  does  not  accept 
it.  The  various  editors  of  the  Farrago  had  had  no  doubt 
as  to  the  authorship  of  the  treatise,  for  they  had  included 
its  twenty-seventh  and  twenty-eighth  chapters  in  the 
section  on  the  Incarnation  and  Passion.  But  even  if  the 
external  evidence  of  Wessel's  authorship  were  not  conclu- 
sive the  internal  evidence  is  abundantly  so.  Whoever 
wrote  the  Farrago  and  the  Letters  wrote  also  this  essay. 
The  style  is  the  same,  many  of  the  ideas  are  the  same, 
phrases  and  illustrations  not  a  few  are  common  to  them 
both.  In  several  cases  ideas  which  are  elaborated  in  the 
Farrago  are  introduced  in  brief  form  in  the  essay  even 
when  not  exactly  germane  to  the  matter  in  hand.  The 
author  appears  to  have  made  digressions  in  order  to  present 
his  views  on  such  controverted  subjects  as  the  authority 


190  Wessel  Gansfort 

of  the  pope  in  the  matter  of  indulgences  and  the  character 
of  the  fires  of  purgatory. 

Though  the  modern  student's  chief  interest  in  this 
treatise  is  naturally  theological,  it  is  in  no  sense  a  theo- 
logical discussion.  It  is  essentially  a  devotional  work, 
one  of  several  that  Wessel  wrote  in  the  latter  years  of 
his  life.  Its  evident  design  is  to  assist  the  communicant 
to  such  an  attitude  of  mind  and  heart  as  shall  enable 
him  to  receive  the  utmost  benefit  from  participation  in 
the  sacrament.  It  is  a  manual  for  the  mass  or  rather  for 
preparation  for  the  mass — since  it  discourages  the  reading 
of  any  devotional  work  and  even  prayer  itself  during 
the  sacramental  service.  Its  practical  design  is  indicated 
by  the  fact  that  it  contains  specific  directions  to  the 
communicant.  Its  devotional  character  appears  in  the 
ease  with  which  the  discussion  turns  into  direct  address 
to  Christ.  In  this  particular  it  resembles  Augustine's 
Confessions. 

As  befits  a  devotional  writing  it  has  in  it  nothing  po- 
lemical. It  contains  no  formal  argument  presenting  the 
author's  conception  of  the  sacrament.  It  does  not  attack 
the  doctrine  of  the  physical  presence  of  Christ,  nor  even 
contain  the  word,  transubstantiation.  It  adroitly  ignores 
the  whole  scholastic  theory  of  the  sacrament  and  centers 
the  attention,  not  on  a  miracle  bewildering  to  the  senses 
and  oppressive  to  the  imagination,  but  on  the  historic 
Christ,  living  and  dying  for  our  salvation.  While  the 
progress  of  the  author's  thought  is  obvious  throughout, 
almost  all  the  chapters  are  variations  on  this  one  theme, 
stated  near  the  beginning  of  the  essay,  "It  is  remembrance 
of  Him  that  constitutes  the  true  Eucharist." 

To  appreciate  the  full  significance  of  that  it  is  necessary 
to  recall  the  fact  that  the  sacramental  development  of  the 
Church  for  the  preceding  five  hundred  years  had  been 
away  from  this  simple  New  Testament  conception.     Its 


The  Treatise  on  the  Eucharist         191 

central  and  essential  feature  was  no  longer  remembrance 
of  Christ  but  the  miracle  of  the  corporeal  presence  of 
Christ  in  the  consecrated  elements.  By  gradual  approach 
the  Medieval  Church  had  come  to  identify  the  elements 
in  the  Lord's  Supper  with  the  historic  body  of  Christ. 
Paschasius  Radbertus  in  844  published  a  treatise  in  which 
he  taught  that  the  substance  of  the  bread  and  wine 
was  at  the  time  of  consecration  changed  by  a  miracle  into 
the  very  body  and  blood  of  Christ.  He  apparently 
believed  that  he  was  stating  the  generally  accepted 
doctrine  of  the  Church.  But  Ratramnus  and  others 
were  prompt  to  deny  this  and  to  affirm  the  earlier  view — 
sanctioned  by  the  authority  of  Augustine — of  the  spiritual 
presence  of  Christ  in  the  sacrament.  A  bitter  controversy 
ensued  in  which  the  general  opinion  of  the  leaders  of  the 
Church  slowly  swung  toward  the  position  taken  by  Rad- 
bertus. Finally,  by  a  decree  of  the  Lateran  Council  in 
12 1 5  this  view  of  the  Eucharist  was  given  the  authority  of 
dogma.  In  the  meantime  the  term,  transubstantiation, 
had  been  adopted  as  expressing  the  mode  of  the  change 
by  which  the  elements  became  the  body  of  Christ,  and  the 
scholastics  had  developed  many  refinements  of  speculation 
regarding  it. 

It  can  hardly  be  supposed  that  Wessel,  who  was  familiar 
with  the  teachings  of  many  of  the  Early  Fathers,  especially 
those  of  Augustine,  and  had  acquaintance  also  with  the 
writings  of  the  scholastics,  could  have  been  wholly  igno- 
rant of  the  course  of  dogmatic  development  which  had 
crystalHzed  into  the  decree  of  the  Lateran  Council.  But 
while  he  doubtless  knew  something  of  those  differing 
opinions  held  by  various  fathers  and  scholastics  it  is 
improbable  that  he  could  see  in  them  anything  resembling 
a  course  of  development.  The  evolutionary  hypothesis 
has  centered  modern  interest  in  the  process  by  which 
one  thing  changes  into  another,  by  which,  for  example,  a 


192  Wessel  Gansfort 

doctrine  in  the  course  of  centuries  is  slowly  transformed 
into  something  quite  different.  But  it  may  be  ques- 
tioned whether  any  medieval  thinker  could  entertain  such 
a  conception.  Wessel  uses  the  historical  argument  in 
defense  of  many  of  his  positions,  3^et  it  is  doubtful  if  he 
could  conceive  of  the  service  of  the  mass,  as  he  witnessed 
it,  as  having  slowly  grown  out  of  the  simple  feast  of  love 
and  memory  celebrated  in  the  Early  Church,  If  he  enter- 
tained such  a  notion  he  gives  no  evidence  of  it.  He  was 
aware  that  his  readers  knew  of  the  Lord's  Supper  only  as 
then  celebrated  in  the  mass.  That  was  the  background 
against  which  he  must  present  his  conception  of  the 
sacrament.  Yet  he  makes  astonishingly  few  references  to 
the  mass,  and  never  undertakes  to  trace  the  relationship 
between  it  and  the  New  Testament  ideal  and  usage.  He 
simply  cites  the  most  pertinent  biblical  passages  concern- 
ing it  and  allows  the  reader  to  draw  his  own  inference.  He 
leaves  the  chasm  unbiidged,  and  lets  the  primitive  con- 
ception of  the  sacrament  as  set  forth  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment stand  in  unrelieved  contrast  with  the  current  doctrine 
and  mode  of  celebration. 

That  is  the  most  striking  feature  of  the  treatise.  It 
was  written  for  readers  whose  only  conception  of  the 
Eucharist  was  that  derived  from  participation  in  the 
stately  service  of  the  mass,  yet  it  presents  a  circle  of  ideas 
that  revolve,  not  about  the  central  feature  of  the  mass, 
the  miraculous  presence  of  Christ  in  the  consecrated  ele- 
ments, but  about  the  historic  Christ  whose  life  and  death 
were  thereby  held  in  loving  and  vivid  remembrance.  It  is 
true  that  in  the  opening  sentences  of  the  treatise  the  reader 
is  conceived  of  as  attending  the  celebration  of  the  mass  in 
some  church  or  perhaps  monastery  chapel,  yet  rarely 
thereafter  does  the  thought  return  to  that  situation. 
The  communicant  is  enjoined  neither  to  read  devotional 
books  nor  engage  in  prayer  while  the  service  of  the  mass  is 


The  Treatise  on  the  Eucharist         193 

in  progress,  but  to  give  liimself  wholly  to  thoughts  of  our 
Lord,  in  obedience  to  his  command:  "This  do  in  re- 
membrance of  me."  That  is  the  point  of  departure, 
for  the  reader  is  forthwith  led  away  from  all  the  external 
features  of  the  sacrament,  the  familiar  place  and  time  and 
mode  of  its  celebration,  to  fix  his  attention  upon  Christ's 
purpose  in  its  institution  and  the  most  beneficial  manner 
of  its  observance. 

As  has  already  been  noticed,  the  one  thought  that 
dominates  the  entire  discussion  is  that  the  Eucharist  is 
essentially  a  memorial  sacrament.  Christ's  words  en- 
joining remembrance  of  himself  might  be  written  at  the 
head  of  almost  every  chapter.  But  remembrance  is  not 
required  for  its  own  sake  alone.  It  is  the  source  of  many 
other  activities  of  the  soul.  'Tf  out  of  remembrance 
there  should  spring  any  pious  affection,  we  are  bidden  not 
to  reject  but  to  cherish  and  encourage  it  together  with  the 
root  from  which  it  sprang."  "Do  you  wish  to  love? 
Recall  what  the  Lord  Jesus  has  done  for  you.  For  it  is 
impossible  to  ponder  frequently  upon  what  your  Lord 
God  and  Saviour  has  done  and  borne  out  of  love  for  you 
without  loving  him  in  return."  Through  remembrance 
also  is  the  presence  of  Christ  achieved.  "In  proportion 
therefore  as  I  remember  thee,  Lord  Jesus,  I  have  thee  as 
my  wealthy  guest,  the  inmate  of  my  peasant  hut."  It  is 
probable  that  this  consciousness  of  the  spiritual  presence 
of  Christ  is  presented  as  a  substitute  for  the  corporeal 
presence  of  Christ  in  the  consecrated  elements,  for  it  too 
effects  a  change  in  the  recipient.  "I  know  that  out  of 
my  hut  and  humble  cottage  thou  wilt  erect  a  noble  house." 
As  a  means  of  sanctification,  the  cultivation  of  the  spiritual 
presence  of  Christ,  through  remembrance,  is  no  less 
effective  than  the  eating  of  his  very  body. 

The  steps  by  which  the  remembrance  of  Christ  effects  a 
change  in  us  are  outlined  in  a  series  of  chapters,  beginning 

VOL.  I — 13 


194  Wessel  Gansfort 

with  the  fourth.  From  remembrance  we  pass  to  reflec- 
tion and  the  discernment  of  the  body  of  Christ,  a  compre- 
hension of  the  completeness  of  the  sacrifice  made  and  the 
salvation  wrought  for  us.  "The  remembrance  of  such 
great  works  of  God  is  indeed  life-giving  bread."  "Have 
not  all  things  developed  out  of  this  kernel  of  remembrance 
and  meditation  ?  The  results  of  science  and  art,  however 
brilliant  or  remarkable,  have  been  secured  by  ponder- 
ing, remembering,  reflecting."  Even  a  foretaste  of  the 
blessed  life  comes  to  him  who  remembers  Christ.  "Here 
on  earth  even  we  may  live  a  great  and  vital  life  if  only  we 
do  not  forsake  this  fount  of  life  vouchsafed  to  us  in  the 
remembrance  of  the  life-giving  body  broken  for  us.  For 
through  this  remembrance  of  thee  we  shall  receive  grace, 
true  wisdom  that  we  may  reach  proper  decisions,  and 
perfect  righteousness."  "Therefore,  Lord  Jesus,  sweetest 
lover  of  mankind,  thou  art  not  merely  with  them  that 
remember  thee  to  aid  them,  but  thou  art  in  them  to  give 
them  life.  I  pray  thee  that  in  view  of  my  realization  of 
thy  presence  now  and  at  all  times,  to  grant  that  I,  thy  son, 
may  always  and  everj'Avhere  faithfully  remember  thee. 
Establish  and  strengthen  me  in  the  way  of  thy  remem- 
brance, by  which  through  thee,  the  Way,  I  may  proceed 
unto  thee,  the  Truth,  and  that  I  may  finally  attain  unto 
thee,  the  Life.  Grant  that  I  may  always  meditate  on 
thee — thy  sufferings,  thy  teachings,  thy  works,  and  thy 
commands.  May  this  meditation  and  remembrance  be 
for  me  the  beginning  of  the  holy  life." 

While  to  some  remembrance  of  Christ  is  thus  the  begin- 
ning of  a  holy  life,  leading  on  to  reflection  and  discernment, 
the  consciousness  of  Christ's  presence,  and  the  fore- 
taste of  the  blessed  hfe,  yet  to  others,  "the  little  ones," 
those  less  capable  of  spiritual  development,  it  is  the 
sufficient  means  of  salvation —  "a  plain  and  easy  way  that 
God  hath  made  for  the  faithful."     Remembrance  is  as 


The  Treatise  on  the  Eucharist  195 

far  as  some  can  go.  "I  advise  ordinary  men,  in  accord- 
ance with  their  strength,  to  take  merely  this  lower  step 
of  the  ladder,  and  not  to  strive  after  higher,  weightier, 
and  more  difficult  things,  for  I  fear  their  inconstancy, 
cowardice,  and  confusion,  their  fall  and  greater  ruin." 
"Be  not  troubled  with  the  lowliness  of  the  act  of  remem- 
brance." "In  this  wisdom  of  the  little  ones  we  may  sit 
at  the  feet  of  Jesus  with  Mary  and  at  the  same  time  minis- 
ter with  Martha."  This  is  in  accord  with  the  medieval 
idea,  appearing  elsewhere  in  Wessel's  writings,  that  the 
ordinary  layman  in  matters  of  religion  is  but  a  child,  a 
"little  one, "  from  whom  it  is  vain  to  expect  much.  The 
only  adult  Christians  are  the  priests  and  monks  and 
others  that  have  specialized  in  religion.  Wessel  not  un- 
naturally adopted  this  common  view;  but  he  is  not  wholly 
consistent  in  reference  to  it,  since  he  elsewhere  insists 
upon  the  priesthood  of  all  believers  and  the  parity  of  all 
Christians. 

But  though  "the  little  ones"  may  well  be  content  with  a 
loving  remembrance  of  Christ,  those  who  are  capable  of 
making  it  the  beginning  of  a  holy  life  are  encouraged  to 
attain  a  deeper  understanding  of  the  sacrament.  Christ 
is  the  bread  of  life,  but  he  is  not  to  be  confused  with  the 
visible  bread  upon  the  altar.  ' '  The  inner  man  is  invisible, 
lives  an  invisible  life,  and  is  nourished  and  strengthened 
by  an  invisible  bread."  This  inner  hfe  of  man  is  created 
in  the  divine  image  and  is  sustained  only  as  it  possesses 
likeness  to  God.  But  the  only  point  at  which  it  may 
resemble  God  is  in  exercising  love  toward  men.  "Love 
is  the  breath  and  life  of  a  godlike  man."  From  it  flow 
all  the  graces  of  the  Christian  life.  To  be  the  bread  of  this 
inner  life  of  love  Christ  must  arouse  and  sustain  our  love. 
This  he  does  by  his  own  love  manifest  in  his  life  and 
death.  We  eat  his  body  only  as  we  love  him  and  love  our 
neighbors.     Mere  corporeal  eating  of  Christ's  body  may 


196  Wessel  Gansfort 

cause  death;  such  spiritual  eating  of  him  in  fideUty  and 
love  sustains  the  life  of  the  soul.  "However  much  one 
may  eat  and  drink  the  visible  Eucharist  with  the  teeth  and 
mouth,  if  the  inner  man  does  not  live  after  God,  he  does 
not  eat!"  The  believing,  obedient  lover  of  Christ  is  the 
only  true  communicant. 

But  if  remembrance  and  the  spiritual  activities  that 
follow  it — faith  and  obedience  and  love  and  the  rest — are 
^  the  essential  things  in  the  sacrament,  then  the  sacrament 
I  may  be  celebrated  wholly  apart  from  visible  bread  and 
/wine  and  the  service  of  a  priest.  He  who  exercises  re- 
membrance and  love  of  Christ  "has  the  benefit  of  outward 
and  sacramental  eating,  just  as  did  Paul,  the  first  hermit." 
"To  eat  is  to  remember,  to  esteem,  to  love."  This 
extreme  ground  Wessel  does  not  hesitate  to  take  and 
defend  with  a  variety  of  arguments.  Christ  said  that 
those  who  eat  his  body  have  eternal  life;  he  also  said 
that  those  who  believe  in  him  have  eternal  life.  Therefore 
those  who  exercise  faith  eat  his  flesh.  But  before  Christ's 
incarnation  the  angels  and  the  faithful  obtained  eternal 
life,  therefore  they  ate  the  flesh  of  the  Son  of  Man.  Many 
Christians  like  Paul  the  hermit  have  no  opportunity  to 
receive  the  sacrament  at  the  hands  of  a  priest,  but  they 
eat  the  body  of  Christ  by  remembrance  and  faith  and 
love.  The  elements  in  the  Eucharist  are  only  symbols, 
their  function  is  to  excite  remembrance.  This  the  sight  of 
them  may  effect  just  as  well  as  the  eating  of  them.  "How 
greatly  we  would  value  bread  which  by  the  mere  sight  of 
it  would  feed  those  who  look  upon  it.  How  greatly,  then, 
must  we  value  this  bread  of  ours  that  quickens  sacra- 
mentally,  for  this  indeed  quickens  and  refreshes  solely 
by  its  symbolism  and  by  our  remembrance."  This 
notion  of  the  celebration  of  the  sacrament  apart  from  any 
visible  elements  indicates — as  one  may  choose  to  regard  it 
— either  the  highly  spiritual  view  of  the  sacrament  that 


The  Treatise  on  the  Eucharist         197 

Wessel  held,  or  the  extremes  to  which  he  was  willing  to 
follow  his  logic.  It  is  interesting  to  recall  that  he  here 
takes  substantially  the  same  ground  to  be  taken  centuries 
later  by  the  most  extreme  of  the  Puritans,  the  Quakers. 

Having  thus  disassociated  the  idea  of  eating  the  body 
of  Christ  from  any  necessary  connection  with  the  merely 
symbolic  bread  of  the  altar,  he  proceeds  to  further  elabo- 
rations of  the  conception  of  spiritual  communion  with 
Christ.  To  remember,  to  believe,  to  love — this  is  to  eat 
the  flesh  of  the  Son  of  Man.  And  since  eating  Christ's 
flesh  in  this  spiritual  sense  is  the  invariable  condition  of 
obtaining  spiritual  life,  this  was  the  means  by  which  the 
angels  and  the  saints  of  the  ancient  world  attained  salva- 
tion. "Before  the  incarnation,  the  angels  did  eat  his  ; 
flesh,  even  as  did  the  Fathers  in  the  wilderness,  through  the 
spirit  of  the  Son." 

From  this  bold  spiritualization  of  the  sacrament,  Wessel 
proceeded  a  debatable  step  further.  He  affirmed  that 
Christ  is  not  only  spiritually  but  also  corporeally  present, 
that  is,  present  with  all  the  saving  potency  that  had 
been  attached  to  his  miraculous  presence  in  the  sacra- 
mental elements,  wherever  the  faithful  remember  and 
beheve  and  love.  To  those  who  thus  feed  upon  him, 
"however  solitary  and  secluded  the  place,  he  is  truly 
there,  not  only  by  virtue  of  his  divinity  and  because  of 
his  good  will,  but  also  corporeally  present  in  all  the  ) 
beneficence  of  the  power,  skill,  and  fruitfulness  that  has  \ 
been  bestowed  upon  flesh  and  blood  throughout  the  world." 
This  idea  is  stated  even  more  emphatically,  and  in  sharp 
contrast  with  the  popular  notion  that  confined  Christ's 
corporeal  presence  to  the  sacramental  bread  and  wine, 
thus:  "To  the  spiritually  faithful  he  is  given,  even  in 
bodily  presence,  outside  the  Eucharist  and  apart  from  the 
forms  of  bread  and  wine,  since  he  is  given  to  those  who 
believe  in  him."     Nor  does  Wessel  hesitate  to  compare 


198  Wessel  Gansfort 

the  spiritual  benefits  of  this  non-sacramental  communion 
with  Christ  with  those  that  may  follow  the  usual  participa- 
tion in  the  sacrament  of  the  altar.  "Indeed,  in  some 
respects  spiritual  communion  is  more  fruitful  than  sacra- 
■  mental,  at  least  in  this  respect,  that  in  the  former,  so 
f  far  as  the  laity  are  concerned,  they  both  eat  and  drink, 
while  in  the  latter  they  only  eat. ' '  It  is  not  to  be  wondered 
at  that  Luther,  whom  Von  Ranke  characterized  as  "one 
of  the  greatest  conservatives  that  ever  lived, "  should 
have  hesitated  to  give  his  approval  to  a  treatise  which 
contained  such  apparent  disparagement  of  the  sacrament 
about  which  the  worship  of  the  Church  had  centered  for 
more  than  a  thousand  years,  and  whose  celebration  was 
believed  to  involve  the  miraculous  presence  and  saving 
power  of  Christ. 

A  still  further  elaboration  of  Wessel 's  thought  regarding 
the  consequences  of  spiritual  communion  with  Christ 
appears  in  Chapter  XIX,  in  which  he  declares  that  by 

esuch  eating  of  Christ  we  are  in  turn  eaten  by  him  and  so 
become  a  part  of  his  body.  By  this  he  means  that  the 
sacrament  has  power  to  take  possession  of  and  transform 
those  who  participate  in  it.  "It  is  just  as  when  iron  is 
made  red  hot,  the  iron  absorbs  the  fire  and  yet  is  entirely 
possessed  thereby.  .  .  .  But  mental  changes  are  even  more 
to  the  point,  for  example,  the  pupil's  faithful  belief  eats, 
so  to  speak,  the  teacher's  wisdom;  and  the  love  of  two 
lovers  is  fed  by  love."  The  transforming  power  of  the 
sacrament  is  elsewhere  affirmed  to  effect  a  species  of  deifica- 
tion, an  idea  that  may  have  been  derived  from  Irenaeus. 
Concerning  the  worthy  communicant  Wessel  asks :  ' '  Does 
it  not  seem  to  you  that  such  a  man  is  in  some  small 
measure  a  god  and  lives  the  blessed  life  even  upon  earth? " 
The  completeness  of  the  sanctification  which  may 
be  wrought  by  this  spiritual  communion  with  Christ  is 
repeatedly  explained  by  the  statement  that  the  sacrament, 


The  Treatise  on  the  Eucharist  199 

though  addressed  to  the  memory  preeminently,  neverthe- 
less nourishes  all  the  other  faculties  of  the  soul.     The 
three   faculties    of    the    soul    are:    memory,    inteUigence 
{intelligentia) ,  and  will,  and  it  is  in  this  order  that  the 
sacrament  makes  its  appeal  and  effects  its  transformation. 
That  this  is  the  psychological  basis  of  Wessel's  theory  of 
sanctification  is  evident  from  his  frequent  reference  to 
these  "three  faculties  of  the   soul"  and  his  minute  an- 
alysis of  their  various  functions.     If  the  current  popular 
conception  of  the  operation  of  the  sacrament  was  in  a 
sense    mechanical    and    automatic    {ex    opere    operato), 
Wessel's  was  distinctly  psychological.     The  benefits  of 
the  sacrament  were  received  through  the  normal  opera- 
tions of  the  mind.     Mere  physical  incorporation  of  the 
elements,  he  says,  is  inoperative.     It  is  through  mental 
processes  that  the  body  of  Christ  is  appropriated  and 
moral  assimilation  to  him  is  wrought.     It  is  the  thought- 
life  of  the  mdividual  that  determines  his  character,  "for 
life  and  death  depend  upon  our  thoughts."     "All  arts, 
all  works  of  knowledge,  counsel,  bravery,  wisdom,  fidelity, 
and  benevolence  have  their  beginning,  seed,  and  root  in 
meditation  and  remembrance.     It  is  also  by  meditation 
that  they  have  grown  and  advanced  toward  perfection,  ■ 
and  when  perfected  shall  be  constantly  fostered."     That 
is  to  say,  spiritual  achievements  are  to  be  attained,  not  by 
sacramental  magic,  but  by  the  same  processes  of  the  soul 
by   which   other   great    accomplishments    are    achieved. 
"  Nothing  is  as  effective  in  turning  men's  thoughts  toward  i 
goodness  as  to  have  one's  thoughts  devoutly  occupied  with  : 
the  life  and  passion  of  our  Lord."     The  great  im.portance  ~] 
which  Wessel  attached  to  the  direction  of  one's  thoughts   ' 
as  a  means  of  sanctification  is  indicated  by  the  fact  that  | 
he  composed  a  long  treatise  for  the  use  of  the  Brothers  of  ', 
Mount  Saint  Agnes  on  the  art  of  thought-control  entitled  ■ 
' '  The  Ladder  of  Meditation. ' '  _i 


200  Wessel  Gansfort 

As  was  stated  at  the  outset,  there  is  in  this  essay  an 
almost  complete  absence  of  the  polemical  note  so  con- 
spicuous in  parts  of  the  Farrago  and  the  longer  Letters. 
Yet  we  find  here  a  few  allusions  to  the  subjects  on  which 
Wessel  had  held  lively  debate  with  his  theological  oppo- 
nents, and  in  these  passages  he  states  clearly  his  criti- 
cism of  current  usages  and  doctrines.  Elsewhere  he  has 
elaborated  his  conception  of  purgatory,  not  as  a  place  of 
suffering  for  sin,  but  as  a  vestibule  of  paradise  where  in- 
creasing love  for  Christ  matures  the  redeemed  soul  and 
advances  it  toward  the  full  bliss  of  heaven.  A  criticism 
of  the  current  conception  and  a  statement  of  his  own  view 
are  thus  adroitly  made  in  the  latter  part  of  Chapter  X. 
In  speaking  of  the  steps  by  which  the  redeemed  come  to 
perfect  acceptance  by  God,  he  says:  "They  alone  will 
be  able  to  live  in  the  eternal  glow  of  divine  love,  because 
they  alone  will  be  made  perfect  by  that  true,  pure,  and 
real  purgatory,  and  will  indeed  burn  with  love.  Nor  do 
those  who  burn  with  such  ardent  affection  need  any 
external  purgatorial  fire;  they  are  purified  as  they  ascend 
the  steps  by  which  they  attain  this  height." 

It  is  in  this  connection  that  one  of  the  allusions  to 
indulgences  occurs.  The  worst  abuses  connected  with 
this  feature  of  the  penitential  system  arose  because  of  the 
popular  belief  that  the  souls  of  departed  friends  might  be 
relieved  from  purgatorial  suffering  and  admitted  into 
heaven  through  indulgences,  which  could  be  secured  by 
the  payment  of  money  or  other  means.  Wessel  scorn- 
fully dismisses  this  method  of  obtaining  access  to  the 
joys  of  heaven.  It  is  not  by  the  purchase  of  indul- 
gences, but  by  ascending  the  steep  path  of  increasing 
love  and  self-sacrifice  that  one  attains  fitness  to  appear 
in  God's  presence.  "For  him  that  runneth  along  this 
sublime  way  our  indulgence-mongers  will  not  be  able  to 
keep  their  indulgences  intact,  unless  they  affirm  that  the 


The  Treatise  on  the  Eucharist         201 

pope  has  plenary  authority  to  provide  for  it — especially 
in  its  later  stages."  At  the  end  of  the  next  chapter, 
speaking  of  the  wrongfully  assumed  authority  of  the 
popes  to  determine  when  and  how  the  soul  may  be  re- 
leased from  purgatory  and  ushered  into  the  joys  of  heaven, 
he  concludes  thus:  "Therefore  no  mortal,  however  great 
his  authority  may  be,  has  the  power  to  fix  or  determine 
anything  concerning  the  mode  or  postponement  of  one's 
purification  or  the  manner  of  one's  reaching  the  end  of 
this  way." 

Besides  these  references  to  purgatory  and  indulgences, 
the  treatise  contains  a  few  somewhat  casual  statements  of 
Wessel's  views  on  other  subjects  theological  in  character. 
In  Chapter  VII  there  is  a  paragraph  in  which  he  presents 
in  a  few  sentences  the  leading  ideas  elaborated  in  his 
essay  on    Divine  Providence.     The  following  statement 
that  the  will  of  God  is  the  basis  of  all  existence  reads 
like  an  utterance  of  Jonathan  Edwards:  "It  is  by  God^s"^, 
will  that  all  the  forces  of  nature,  all  its  changes,  processes,  ' 
and  growth  are  fixed  within  their  appointed  limits;  so  j 
that  if  he  ceased  to  exert  his  will,  even  for  one  moment,  ' 
everything  would  return  forthwith  to  its  original  state,  ( 
nothingness." 

The  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  is  several  times 
stated,  and  in  terms  unmistakably  Pauline.  In  Chapter 
II  the  substitutionary  theory  of  the  atonement  is  pre- 
sented at  some  length.  There  are  implications  of  it 
elsewhere.  Especially  interesting  in  view  of  Wessel's 
insistence  upon  the  supreme  authority  of  the  Scriptures 
is  his  statement  of  the  principle  of  biblical  interpretation. 
He  assails  the  use  of  isolated  proof-texts  so  convenient  to 
the  dogmatist,  and  insists  upon  an  inductive  study  of  the 
passages  bearing  upon  the  subject  under  discussion.  For 
example,  he  says  that  before  one  should  come  to  a  conclu- 
sion as  to  the  meaning  of  such  a  scriptural  phrase  as  "the 


202  VVessel  Gansfort 

bread  that  strengthens  man's  heart,"  he  should  study 
"all  the  words  to  the  same  purport  that  are  scattered 
throughout  Scripture,  in  order  that  from  all  these  points" 
the  complete  truth  may  be  seen.  By  such  a  statement 
Wessel  dissents  from  the  rigidly  deductive  method  of  the 
theologians  of  his  day,  and  allies  himself  with  the  modern 
biblical  scholar. 

One  of  the  casual  elements  in  the  internal  evidence  of 
Wessel's  authorship  of  the  treatise  appears  in  the  use  of 
illustrations  that  would  be  likely  to  occur  only  to  a 
physician.  In  the  first  part  of  Chapter  VII,  in  an  exposi- 
tion of  the  statement  of  our  Lord  that  a  man  does  not 
live  by  bread  only,  "but  by  every  word  that  proceedeth 
out  of  the  mouth  of  God, "  appears  this  passage  which 
betrays  the  physician,  if  not  the  exact  anatomist:  "It 
is  then  by  God's  command  that  the  visible  bread,  through 
the  bodily  organs,  strengthens  the  eater's  heart;  since  it  is 
by  his  will  that  it  is  digested  by  the  stomach,  drawn 
into  the  liver,  changed  into  blood,  and  through  the  veins 
distributed  into  the  limbs!" 


CHAPTER  XII 

FARRAGO  RERUM  THEOLOGICARUM 

Such  is  the  title  that  was  given  to  the  first  collection  of 
Wessel's  writings  to  appear  in  print.  Farrago  means 
^^  medley  or  miscellany,  and  its  use  here  indicates  that  the 
editor  realized  the  lack  of  unity  and  order  in  the  collection 
of  writings  that  he  was  issuing.  Hardenberg,  Wessel's 
earliest  biographer,  relates  the  circumstances  under  which 
these  documents  were  collected  and  printed.  Several 
Dutch  scholars  favorable  to  the  Reformation,  most 
prominent  among  whom  was  Cornelius  Honius,  an  eminent 
advocate  at  The  Hague,  had  become  interested  in  certain 
writings  of  Wessel  which  had  been  found  among  the 
papers  left  by  Jacob  Hoeck,  at  one  time  dean  at  Naeldwick. 
Realizing  that  the  views  presented  therein  were  in  sub- 
stantial agreement  with  the  doctrines  being  taught  by 
Luther,  they  decided  to  submit  them,  and  such  other 
writings  of  Wessel  as  they  could  find,  to  Luther's  approval. 
Rhodius,  one  of  the  many  Brethren  of  the  Common  Life 
who  adopted  Protestantism,  was  chosen  to  go  to  Witten- 
berg and  bring  these  writings  of  the  Dutch  scholar  to  the 
attention  of  the  Saxon  Reformer.  The  impression  which 
they  made  upon  Luther  is  indicated  by  his  commendatory 
letter  to  Rhodius  concerning  them,  and  by  his  advocacy 
of  their  immediate  publication,  as  offering  strong  support 
to  his  cause. 

The  Farrago  soon  passed  through  many  editions  and 
underwent  extensive  expansion  in  the  process  as  other 

203 


204  VVessel  Gansfort 

writings  of  Wessel  bearing  upon  the  subjects  treated  there- 
in came  to  light.  The  earUest  issue  contains  no  sure  in- 
dication as  to  its  time  or  place,  but  its  appearance  could 
not  well  have  been  later  than  1521.  Very  soon  after 
appeared  the  Wittenberg  edition,  and  in  September,  1522, 
that  of  Adam  Petri  of  Basel,  who  brought  out  still  another 
edition  in  the  following  year.  A  fifth  edition  was  issued 
in  Marburg  in  161 7.  The  Farrago  also  had  its  place  in  the 
complete  collection  of  Wessel's  writings  then  extant  which 
had  been  published  in  Groningen  in  1614. 

The  structure  of  the  Farrago  is  implied  in  its  title.  It 
is  not  a  literary  unit.  It  is  a  collection  of  essays  and 
letters  and  series  of  propositions  and  fragments,  roughly 
grouped  under  six  heads.  As  a  consequence,  it  is  in 
places  rather  difficult  and  unsatisfactory  reading.  It 
possesses,  however,  this  merit,  that  in  a  comparatively 
small  compass  it  presents  the  author's  views  on  a  wide 
range  of  subjects,  especially  those  in  which  he  anticipated 
the  teachings  of  the  Reformers.  It  also  illustrates  the 
variety  of  literary  forms  in  which  he  was  accustomed  to 
present  his  ideas. 

As  to  the  source  of  the  materials  that  compose  the 
Farrago,  it  has  been  already  noticed  that  Cornelius  Honius 
and  his  friends  had  found  among  the  papers  of  Jacob  Hoeck 
several  of  the  documents  that  compose  the  first  edition. 
Further  search  elsewhere  brought  other  related  writings 
of  Wessel  to  light,  and  these  were  incorporated  in  the 
later  editions.  In  his  later  years  at  least,  Wessel  was 
an  industrious  writer  and  an  inveterate  correspondent. 
Although  the  monks  may  have  burned  such  literary  re- 
mains of  his  as  they  could  find  in  the  cloister  in  which  he 
died,  yet  most  of  his  writings  appear  to  have  survived  this 
characteristic  attempt  to  answer  arguments  by  fire.  This 
may  have  been  due  to  the  fact  that  his  writings  had  been 
copied  by  his  admiring  pupils  or  were  being  circulated 


Farrago  Rerum  Theologicarum         205 

among  his  friends  outside  of  Groningen.  Apparently  no 
attempt  was  made  by  the  editors  of  the  Farrago  to  secure 
anything  more  than  representative  statements  of  Wessel's 
views  on  the  matters  then  under  controversy.  This 
gives  a  fragmentary  character  to  certain  sections  of  the 
book;  one  comes  upon  passages  from  letters,  excerpts 
from  other  treatises,  propositions  designed  for  discussion 
with  his  students,  comments  on  the  writings  of  others,  and 
extended  expositions  of  Scripture. 

The  editor's  division  of  the  subject  matter  into  six 
chapters  aids  the  reader  somewhat,  but  with  two  excep- 
tions there  is  much  matter  in  each  chapter  that  does  not 
relate  itself  readily  to  the  chapter-heading.  As  for  the 
subdivisions  of  each  chapter,  they  are  of  two  sorts.  In 
the  long  and  consecutive  treatments,  such  as  the  essay 
on  Divine  Providence,  the  subheads  are  like  insets  in  a 
modern  text-book;  they  merely  summarize  the  contents 
of  the  page  or  paragraph.  In  other  cases,  the  captions  of 
the  subdivisions  often  introduce  matter  that  has  no  struc- 
tural relation  to  what  has  gone  before,  but  is  evidently 
introduced  because  it  is  believed  to  have  some  bearing 
upon  the  general  subject  under  discussion  in  the  chapter. 
Several  of  these  headings  indicate  the  source  of  the  mate- 
rial that  they  introduce,  e.g.  "Extracts  from  a  letter  of 
Wessel,"  or  "Propositions  sent  to  Master  Ludolph,  Dean 
of  St.  Martin's  Church."  Such  captions  prepare  the 
reader  for  the  abrupt  changes  in  style  and  matter  which 
he  frequently  encounters,  and  remind  him  that  he  is 
reading  a  miscellany. 

But  in  spite  of  the  inorganic  character  of  the  Farrago 
and  the  lack  of  critical  care  on  the  part  of  its  editors,  it 
makes  a  deep  impression  upon  the  patient  reader.  He 
finds  himself  in  the  presence  of  a  religious  genius  as 
unique  as  the  author  of  The  Imitation  of  Christ  or  of  Theolo- 
gia  Germanica,  with,  however,  none  of  the  monastic  narrow- 


2o6  Wessel  Gansfort 

ness  of  the  former  or  the  nebulous  thinking  of  the  latter. 
He  meets  also  one  who  is  not  only  thoroughly  orientated 
in  the  learning  of  his  day,  but  one  who  is  an  original 
thinker  upon  the  deepest  problems  of  life,  a  mystical 
yet  scientific  interpreter  of  Scripture,  a  fearless  critic 
of  the  Church  of  his  day,  a  constructive  teacher  of 
evangelical  truth,  and  hence  a  prophet  of  the  coming 
Reformation. 

The  wide  range  of  the  author's  thought  in  the  Farrago 
is  often  indicated  by  the  number  and  variety  of  writers 
cited.  In  the  essay  upon  the  Divine  Providence,  for  ex- 
ample, he  makes  reference  to  the  views  held  by  such  an- 
cient philosophers  as  Proclus,  Plato,  Aristotle,  Alexander, 
and  Themistius,  as  well  as  to  those  of  the  well-known 
medieval  theologians  and  such  obscure  authors  as 
"Brother  John  of  Aachen."  Among  the  ancient  Fathers 
Augustine  is  most  often  quoted  and  almost  always  with 
approval.  Indeed,  it  may  be  said  that  Wessel  was  more 
indebted  to  him  than  to  any  other  non-biblical  writer. 
Gregory  of  Nazianzus,  Ambrose,  and  Jerome  are  also 
frequently  cited,  and  among  medieval  writers  Averroes, 
Gerson,  William  of  Paris,  Thomas  Aquinas,  Francis  of 
Assisi,  and  Bernard  of  Clairvaux.  The  parts  of  the  Bible 
most  often  alluded  to  are  the  Psalms,  the  writings  of 
St.  Paul,  and  those  parts  of  the  Gospels  which  record  our 
Lord's  dealings  with  individuals. 

There  are  in  the  Farrago  certain  frequently  recurrent 
ideas.  They  may  be  regarded  as  the  outstanding  con- 
ceptions of  Wessel's  never  fully  formulated  theological 
system.  Many  of  them  involve  some  suggestive  biblical 
passage.  Among  those  that  meet  the  reader  most  often 
.are  the  following: 

\    There  is  a  gradual  revelation  of  God  to  the  individual 

'believer.    We  now  see  Him  dimly,  as  in  the  light  of  a  lamp; 

death  will  come  as  the  day  star  ushering  in  the  dawn  of 


Farrago  Rerum  Theologlcarum         207 

larger  knowledge;  then  will  gradually  come  the  sunrise; 
finally,  the  full  daylight  of  the  beatific  vision. 

All  Christians,  and  indeed  the  angels  also  are  "way- 
farers"— a  word  derived,  perhaps,  from  the  New  Testa- 
ment description  of  the  Christians  as  "those  of  the  way. " 
They  are  en  route,  in  the  process  of  being  perfected,  and 
all  the  experiences  of  their  lives  are  to  be  viewed  in  their 
relation  to  this  pilgrimage  toward  God. 

The  Catholic  Church  consists  of  the  faithful  followers  of 
Christ  in  every  land.  The  basis  of  their  unity  is  spiritual, 
not  political.  It  rests  upon  their  common  faith  and  hope 
and  love  and  their  common  possession  of  the  Spirit. 

The  communion  of  the  saints  is  the  spiritual  fellowship 
that  exists  among  the  children  of  God  in  all  lands  and  ages. 
This  is  affirmed  by  the  Psalmist  when  he  declares  that  he 
is  "a  companion  of  all  those  that  fear  God. " 

The  Treasury  of  the  Church  consists  of  the  spiritual 
benefits  to  be  derived  from  this  communion  of  the  saints, 
and  more  especially  of  the  grace  of  God  mediated  through 
Christ  in  his  Church. 

The  relations  of  the  Christian  with  Christ  are  immediate 
and  personal,  as  were  those  of  his  first  disciples  and  fol- 
lowers ;  they  are  not  dependent  upon  the  mediation  of  the 
Church. 

Abraham,  David,  Peter,  Paul,  and  Magdalene,  and  the 
repentant  thief  are  typical  examples  of  a  valid,  saving 
religious  experience,  and  to  this  fact  the  Church's  doctrine 
of  salvation  must  conform. 

Faith,  which  includes  belief  and  self-commitment,  is 
the  means  by  which  a  man  comes  into  saving  relations 
to  Christ. 

Love  to  God  and  to  our  fellows  is  the  only  sure  evidence 
of  the  possession  of  spiritual  life.  Loving  contemplation 
of  the  Hfe  and  passion  of  Christ  is  the  most  profitable  occu- 
pation of  the  Christian,  for  by  this  means  his  life  is  infused 


2o8  Wessel  Gansfort 

into  us.  "No  one  lives  who  does  not  love" — an  oft- 
repeated  sentiment,  apparently  adopted  from  Raymond 
Lull. 

The  death  of  the  Christian  is  precious  in  the  sight  of  the 
Lord,  since  it  brings  the  exile  home  to  the  fatheriand,  and 
ushers  the  wayfarer  out  of  the  lamplight  of  this  dim  life 
into  the  fuller  knowledge  and  love  of  paradise. 

There  is  no  other  purgatory  than  this  joyous  paradise, 
whose  fires  are  nothing  else  than  the  purifying  love  which 
the  more  clearly  discerned  presence  of  Christ  kindles,  till 
the  soul  wholly  possessed  of  love  attains  to  the  complete 
vision  of  God. 

The  great  mass  of  believers  are  Christ's  "little  ones," 
children  in  the  religious  life,  for  whom  the  tenderest  con- 
sideration must  be  exercised,  lest  they  be  given  occasion 
to  stumble.  According  to  this  medieval  conception  priests 
and  monks  are  the  only  adult  Christians.  Of  laymen  and 
women  not  much  religious  knowledge  or  moral  achieve- 
ment is  to  be  expected. 

The  Scriptures  are  inspired  by  God,  and  are  the  final 
authority  in  faith  and  conduct.  They  require,  however, 
great  care  in  their  interpretation. 

The  efficacy  of  the  sacraments  depends  upon  the 
spiritual  attitude  of  the  recipient,  and  this  no  one  but  God 
can  determine. 

The  forgiveness  of  Christ  is  so  perfect  that  the  Church 
has  no  right  to  impose  penance  upon  the  repentant  as  the 
condition  of  absolution. 

The  pope,  having  no  authority  to  impose  penance, 
and  no  sure  knowledge  of  the  spiritual  condition  of  the 
penitent,  and  no  right  to  draw  upon  the  Treasury  of  the 
Church,  cannot  grant  an  indulgence,  plenary  or  other. 

The  proper  function  of  a  priest  or  prelate  is  that  of  a 
minister  of  the  truth  and  the  sacraments,  a  physician  to 
the  spiritually  ill,  not  a  prince  or  judge. 


Farrago  Rerum  Theologicarum         209 

'  No  prelate,  not  even  the  pope,  is  to  be  obeyed  if 
his  commands  do  not  accord  with  the  teachings  of  the 
Scriptures. 

^  The  Church  is  badly  administered  by  corrupt  and 
ignorant  men,  nevertheless  the  children  of  God  are  safe 
in  her  keeping. 

It  is  sin,  not  excommunication,  that  separates  a  soul 
from  God. 

It  is  impossible  to  present  a  satisfactory  summary  of  the 
contents  of  the  Farrago,  for  with  the  exception  of  two  of  its 
main  divisions  it  consists  largely  of  excerpts  from  Wessel's 
various  writings  and  of  series  of  propositions  in  which  the 
thought  is  set  forth  in  the  most  compact  form  possible. 
Nevertheless,  there  are  certain  outstanding  ideas  in  each 
section  of  the  book  which  form  the  nucleus  about  which 
even  the  least  closely  articulated  passages  are  grouped.  A 
brief  exposition  of  these  leading  ideas,  either  by  quotation 
or  summarization,  will  now  be  attempted.  For  the  sake 
of  convenience  in  reference,  the  order  of  the  main  divisions 
or  chapters  will  be  followed. 


CONCERNING  THE  SURE  AND  BENIGN  PROVIDENCE 
OF  GOD. 

This  section  presents  a  consecutive  treatment  of  its 
theme  in  a  somewhat  formal  essay,  whose  argument  may 
be  summarized  as  follows :  God  is  the  efficient  cause  of  all 
things.  His  will  gives  energy  to  nature  and  to  man. 
Every  creature  expresses  the  thought  of  the  divine  artist. 
Though  not  dependent  upon  them,  God  ordinarily  works 
through  secondary  causes,  which  are  little  more  than  oc- 
casions for  man  to  cooperate  with  Him.  In  this  coopera- 
tion with  God  lies  the  opportunity  for  godliness  or  sin. 
14 


210  Wessel  Gansfort 

Because  of  this  conscious  cooperation  or  its  failure,  we 
shall  at  the  last  judgment  approve  God's  verdict  upon 
our  lives. 

The  reverent  soul  sees  in  the  forces  of  nature  an  expres- 
sion of  the  goodness  of  God.  Nature  is  not  automatic. 
It  is  nothing  less  than  "the  will  of  God  regulated  by  the 
law  of  uniformity;  while  a  miracle  is  the  will  of  the  same 
God  exerted  in  some  unusual  manner. "  "  Strange  to  say, 
although  a  man's  destruction  is  the  result  of  his  own  ac- 
tion, his  salvation  is  due  entirely  to  the  will  of  God;  for 
the  will  of  God  is  the  Book  of  Life  in  which  are  enrolled 
all  the  sons  of  God."  The  will  of  God  is  related  also  to 
the  most  minute  occurrence,  to  the  death  of  the  sparrow 
and  to  the  fall  of  the  leaf.  Some  unhappy  change  in 
man's  relation  to  nature  occurred  in  connection  with  the 
Fall,  but  nature  still  serves  man's  need,  though  not  without 
his  wise  cooperation. 

It  is  God  also  who  gives  efficiency  to  the  operation  of 
man's  mental  and  spiritual  faculties.  It  is  in  the  light 
of  God's  countenance  that  our  minds  behold  the  light 
of  truth.  "As  God  is  the  light  of  the  potential  intellect, 
causing  it  to  comprehend,  so  is  he  the  standard  of  all 
values,  the  highest  measure  of  intelligence,  the  first  spark 
of  the  will,  the  primal  energizing  cause."  Our  best 
impulses  and  the  imperative  of  conscience  are  due  to  the 
direct  influence  of  God  upon  us. 

The  term  of  a  man's  life  depends  ultimately  upon  God, 
who  having  united  man's  soul  and  body  can  alone  sepa- 
rate them.  "Man  does  not  live  by  bread  alone  but  by 
every  word  that  proceedeth  out  of  the  mouth  of  God, 
that  is  to  say,  bread  sustains  a  man's  life  only  so  long  as 
God  thus  directs  it."  "He  who  died  for  each  of  us  will 
also  for  each  of  us  come  and  knock,  as  he  ordered,  as  he 
promised."  Hence  death  is  not,  as  Aristotle  asserts,  the 
king  of  terrors,  since  it  does  not  separate  us  from  what  we 


Farrago  Rerum  Theologicarum         211 

most  love.  Instead  of  being  a  punishment  it  is  the  means 
of  our  greatest  blessing.  It  returns  the  exile  to  his  father- 
land. It  is  escape  from  the  ills  of  sickness  and  old  age  and 
is  admission  into  larger  service.  Hence  it  is  well  to  medi- 
tate trustfully  upon  death,  and  upon  Christ  who  has  made 
it  the  gate  of  paradise  to  those  who  trust  him,  even  though 
they  are  as  unworthy  as  the  repentant  thief.  Nor  should 
we  be  disheartened  because  of  the  high  exactions  of  the 
gospel  and  our  feeble  desires,  since  God's  grace  will  abound 
toward  his  ''httle  ones,"  and  it  is  his  will,  not  ours,  that 
saves  us. 

In  emphasizing  the  immanence  of  God,  Wessel  never 
loses  sight  of  his  transcendence.  This  forms  the  back- 
ground against  which  he  presents  the  divine  agency  in 
nature  and  in  human  life.  He  avoided  the  pantheism  of 
Eckhart  and  other  Mystics  and  the  absolute  determinism 
to  which  Luther  was  unfortunately  led  to  commit  himself. 


II 


CONCERNING  THE  CAUSES,  MYSTERIES,  AND  EFFECTS 
OF  THE  INCARNATION  AND  PASSION  OF  OUR  LORD. 

This  division  consists  mainly  of  eight  series  of  proposi- 
tions deahng  with  as  many  different  aspects  of  the  two 
subjects  treated  therein.  These  sets  of  propositions  are  of 
two  sorts:  those  that  move  altogether  in  the  circle  of 
bibHcal  ideas,  and  those  that  are  quite  independent  of  any 
direct  scriptural  basis.  A  good  example  of  the  former  is 
the  series  concerning  the  partaking  of  the  body  and  blood 
of  Christ,  while  the  latter  class  is  best  illustrated  by  the 
two  allegorical  series  upon  The  Combat  between  the  Lamb 
and  the  Dragon  and  The  Mystery  of  the  Cross  and  the 
Flaming  Sword.  The  latter  reveal  a  mystical  bent  in 
Wessel  which  is  usually  subordinated  to  a  strictly  critical 


212  Wessel  Gansfort 

and  logical  method.  The  rigidly  individual  character  of 
the  treatment  is  indicated  by  the  fact  that  throughout 
the  section  there  is  reference  to  but  one  extra-biblical 
writer,  Augustine. 

The  discussion  opens  with  ten  biblical  reasons  for  the 
incarnation,  e.  g.  that  the  Church  might  have  a  proper 
Head,  that  the  School  of  God  might  have  a  Teacher,  that 
for  all  who  sacrifice  there  might  be  a  Victim,  that  the  Sons 
of  God  might  have  a  Firstborn  Brother,  etc.  But  the 
incarnation  was  no  more  necessitated  by  the  different 
needs  of  man  indicated  in  the  ten  biblical  titles  applied  to 
Christ,  than  by  a  certain  necessity  of  self-expression  on 
the  part  of  God.  The  divine  nature  remained  a  sealed 
book — not  to  man  alone  but  to  all  God's  creatures — till  it 
was  revealed  in  Jesus  Christ.  Though  it  was  for  our  salva- 
tion that  Christ  came,  yet  it  was  not  wholly  for  this  pur- 
pose. The  incarnation  was  a  necessary  expression  of  the 
divine  nature  quite  apart  from  man's  need  of  redemption. 
"If  neither  angel  nor  man  had  fallen,  the  Lamb  would  have 
reigned  equally  blessed  over  them  both." 

The  necessity  of  the  incarnation,  from  the  human  stand- 
point, appears  in  the  fact  that  it  is  only  through  the  trust- 
ful, loving  contemplation  of  Jesus  Christ  and  his  passion 
that  we  come  into  fullest  communion  with  God.  "The 
shortest  way  to  God  is  sweet  and  pious  meditation  on  Jesus 
Christ. "  Such  meditation  is  also  the  surest  means  for  the 
cultivation  of  the  Christian  graces,  "for  nothing  is  so 
effective  in  turning  men's  minds  toward  goodness  as  to  be 
devoutly  occupied  with  the  life  and  passion  of  our  Lord. " 
By  this  means  also  are  we  drawn  into  close  and  saving 
relations  to  Christ,  so  that  his  life  is  imparted  to  us.  "For 
the  life  of  Jesus,  great  and  holy  before  God,  is  bestowed 
upon  us  in  so  far  as  we  cling  to  him  by  reflecting  upon, 
esteeming,  and  loving  him."  It  is  by  contemplation  of 
him  as  "the  consubstantial  deity"  that  we  come  to  pes- 


Farrago  Rerum  Theologicarum         213 

sess  "the  exalted  heart"  referred  to  in  Psalm  lxiv:  and 
"there  is  no  access  to  the  exalted  God  but  by  the  exalted 
heart." 

The  subdivision  that  deals  with  the  Lamb's  battle  with 
the  Dragon  presents  in  a  somewhat  grotesque  fashion  the 
contest  between  evil  and  the  tender  love  and  compassion 
of  God.  This  conflict  took  place  not  merely  by  God's 
permission,  but  by  his  appointment.  "God,  cooperating 
with  the  Dragon,  smote  the  Lamb!"  Although  in  this 
combat  the  Lamb  could  fight  only  with  the  love,  patience, 
meekness,  and  longsuffering  of  a  lamb,  yet  by  these  he 
utterly  overcame  the  Dragon  and  all  the  hosts  of  evil,  so 
that  every  knee  shall  bow  to  him.  "Christ  suffered  a 
heavier  calamity  than  the  sins  of  all  men  deserved,  that 
the  grace  of  God  might  superabound. "  "To  one  who 
loves  the  Lamb  perfectly  the  Lamb's  cross  becomes  his 
own."  Such  love  repeats  the  Lamb's  combat  with  the 
Dragon  of  evil  that  exists  in  every  nature.  Even  more 
fanciful  are  the  propositions  relating  to  the  Cross  and  the 
Flaming  Sword  that  guarded  the  way  to  Paradise.  The 
resemblance  of  the  sword-hilt,  with  its  transverse  guard, 
to  the  cross  had  been  noticed  by  the  Crusaders  and  others, 
who  had  sometimes  sworn  by  their  swords  as  by  the  cross. 
But  Wessel's  contention  would  seem  to  be  that  the  way 
to  the  Tree  of  Life,  that  is,  Christ,  is  not  by  the  Cross 
alone,  but  by  the  flaming  two-edged  Sword.  In  other 
words,  it  is  inaccessible  to  the  coward  or  the  idler  or  the 
indifferent. 

In  the  remaining  sections  of  the  chapter  we  have  certain 
distinctly  evangelical  views  set  forth  as  to  the  means  by 
which  the  benefits  of  Christ's  incarnation  and  passion  are 
to  be  appropriated.  As  these  views  are  presented  at 
greater  length  elsewhere,  they  require  but  brief  notice 
here.  In  an  adroit  arrangement  of  our  Lord's  statements 
regarding  the  means  by  which  he  imparts  his  life  to  his 


214  Wessel  Gansfort 

followers,  Wessel  presents  his  own  view  that  the  real  appro- 
priation of  Christ  is  by  loving  faith,  and  that  the  Eucharist 
is  only  one  of  many  means  by  which  we  may  eat  the  flevsh 
and  drink  the  blood  of  the  Son  of  Man.  Magdalene, 
through  her  love  and  sympathy  with  Christ's  sufferings 
partook  of  his  life.  Such  participation  is  much  more 
efficacious  than  "if  with  parched  heart  and  cold  will  we 
partake  of  the  Eucharist  at  the  altar  ten  thousand  times!" 
It  is  also  by  faith  that  the  perfect  sacrifice  of  our  High 
Priest  becomes  ours;  thus  every  son  of  God  may  minister 
the  benefits  of  this  sacrifice  to  himself.  This  is  the  Pro- 
testant doctrine,  elsewhere  elaborated,  of  the  priesthood 
of  all  believers.  Since  our  regeneration  is  wrought  by 
God,  and  our  faith  is  the  proof  of  our  regeneration,  the 
strength  of  our  faith,  fortunately,  is  not  the  measure  of  the 
efficacy  of  God's  grace  on  our  behalf.  The  chapter  closes 
with  a  resume  of  the  doctrine  of  justification  as  set  forth 
in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  There  is  little  attempt  at 
interpretation  of  Paul's  words  and  no  reference  whatever 
to  the  creedal  statements  of  this  doctrine  or  the  teachings 
of  the  theologians  concerning  it. 


CONCERNING  ECCLESIASTICAL  DIGNITY  AND  POWER. 

The  main  thesis  of  this  chapter,  which  like  the  first 
consists  of  a  somewhat  consecutive  treatment,  is  that  the 
Church  is  under  no  obligation  to  accept  what  the  pope 
teaches  or  obey  what  he  commands,  unless  his  teachings 
and  commands  are  in  agreement  with  the  gospel.  The 
:  individual  Christian  must  decide  as  to  this  agreement. 
What  is  affirmed  of  the  pope  is,  of  course,  even  more  true 
of  the  clergy  below  him.  That  popes  may  err  is  demon- 
strated in  the  case  of  Peter  who,  as  is  related  in  Galatians 


Farrago  Rerum  Theologicarum         215 

II,  committed  a  grave  error  in  principle  and  conduct  and 
was  rebuked  and  corrected  by  Paul.  This  was  provi- 
dentially designed  to  teach  the  Church  of  all  ages  that  her 
prelates  are  fallible  and  subject  to  correction.  Recent 
examples  of  papal  error  are  afforded  by  Benedict  and 
Boniface  and  John  XXIII,  who  were  condemned  by  the 
Council  of  Constance,  and  by  Pius  II  and  Sixtus  IV, 
whose  assumptions  of  unwarranted  authority  did  great 
injury  to  the  Church. 

Having  laid  down  the  general  principle  of  the  falHbihty  of 
prelates,  Wessel  proceeds  to  re-interpret  certain  passages  of 
Scripture  which  were  being  adduced  in  support  of  the  papal 
claim  to  unquestioning  obedience.  He  affirms  also  that 
the  lives  of  some  prelates  are  "so  scandalous  that  they 
corrupt  by  their  example  more  than  they  edify  by  their 
speech,  and  are  no  longer  to  be  tolerated."  He  asserts 
that  in  accepting  wealth  and  assuming  judicial  authority 
the  early  Fathers  of  the  Church  adopted  a  wrong  course, 
and  that  simony  and  other  serious  abuses  have  resulted 
therefrom.  Gerson's  opinion  that  the  times  and  seasons 
appointed  by  the  Church  are  only  to  be  observed  when 
they  appear  reasonable  is  approved.  Such  regulations 
are  to  be  regarded  as  admonitory,  not  mandatory;  so 
also  are  counsels  of  precaution  to  those  who  are  weak  in 
the  faith.  "I  am  amazed,"  he  adds,  "at  those  who  are 
ready  to  beget  obHgation  out  of  admonition."  "The 
flock  is  possessed  of  reason  and  free  choice,  and  is  not 
absolutely  given  over  to  the  power  of  the  shepherd  so  that 
nothing  is  required  of  it  except  to  obey  him."  All  au- 
thority in  matters  of  religion  proceeds  from  God,  and 
nothing  that  the  prelates  enjoin  is  to  be  obeyed  unless  it 
accords  with  God's  will  as  indicated  in  the  Gospel,  "for 
it  is  for  God's  sake  that  we  believe  the  Gospel,  and  for  the 
Gospel's  sake  that  we  believe  the  Church  and  the  pope. 
We  do  not  believe  the  Gospel  for  the  Church's  sake." 


2i6  Wessel  Gansfort 

The  opinion  of  the  theological  expert  and  the  "wise  man" 
is  to  be  preferred  to  that  of  the  less  informed  prelate,  and 
the  decision  of  a  Church  Council  to  that  of  a  pope.  "It 
belongs  to  the  theologian  to  define  how  far  the  commands 
of  pontiffs  are  obligatory."  "Often  a  regularly  elected 
pope  is  a  false  apostle  and  a  regularly  elected  prelate  is  a 
false  pastor." 

In  affirming  that  the  mutual  obligation  of  religious  su- 
perior and  inferior  grows  out  of  a  compact,  and  that 
when  its  terms  are  violated  its  voluntary  obligation  ceases 
he  introduces  a  distinctly  democratic  conception  of 
the  Church.  The  Mendicants'  custom  of  electing  their 
Superior  annually  is  approved,  and  the  principle  is  recom- 
mended in  the  election  of  bishops  and  civil  magistrates, 
even  of  monarchs.  "Kings  should  not  be  obeyed  in  evil 
measures;  more  than  that,  they  may  justly  be  driven  from 
their  thrones,  unless  there  is  danger  that  still  greater 
evils  would  result  therefrom."  The  relation  of  the  pope 
to  the  Church  may  be  compared  to  that  of  a  physician  to 
a  patient;  if  the  pope  is  unskillful  or  faithless,  the  patient, 
that  is,  the  flock,  suffers  injury  in  consequence.  Thus  the 
keys  of  the  kingdom  suffer  abuse  in  his  unworthy  hands. 
It  is,  however,  the  Church  itself  that  is  to  blame  for  the 
arrogance  and  corruption  of  its  prelates.  The  better 
monasteries  afford  an  illustration  of  what  can  be  done  in 
the  way  of  selecting  good  rulers. 


IV 


CONCERNING  THE  SACRAMENT  OF  PENANCE,  THE 
KEYS  OF  THE  CHURCH,  THE  POWER  OF  BINDING 
AND   LOOSING. 

This   chapter   contains   a   discussion   of   ecclesiastical 
authority.     It  opens  awkwardly  with  excerpts  from  two 


Farrago  Rerum  Theologicarum         217 

of  Wessel's  letters,  and  consists  of  many  different  docu- 
ments which  present  the  same  ideas  but  from  a  variety 
of  view  points.  Its  general  attitude  toward  the  subjects 
treated  may  be  inferred  from  the  following  statement 
concerning  the  binding  and  loosing  power  possessed  by  the 
apostles:  "They  had  the  power  to  provide  the  words  of 
the  Gospel ;  they  could  minister  to  believers  the  mysteries 
of  grace,  the  sacrament  of  charisms,  and  the  precepts  of 
salvation.  All  who  received  these  dutifully  were  loosed 
from  the  bonds  of  captivity  to  the  devil."  The  clergy 
have  inherited  from  the  apostles  a  similar  power.  Those 
who  accept  their  ministry  of  the  gospel  and  the  sacraments 
are  loosed  from  the  bonds  of  Satan,  those  who  refuse  it  are 
still  bound  thereby.  This  is  done,  however,  not  by  any 
judicial  authority  but  in  the  exercise  of  their  ministry. 

As  to  the  meaning  of  "  the  keys  of  the  kingdom, "  Wessel 
adopts  Augustine's  view  that  by  them  is  meant  the  gift 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  who  diffuses  love  in  the  heart  of  the 
recipient,  since  it  is  love  alone  that  admits  to  Christian 
fellowship ;  but  he  adds  to  the  gift  of  the  Spirit  the  obliga- 
tion of  pastoral  service.  These  were  the  keys  by  which 
Peter  was  empowered  to  admit  men  into  the  kingdom. 
The  pope  shares  in  Peter's  possession  of  the  keys  to  the 
extent  of  his  likeness  to  Peter.  "In  so  far  as  he  is  influenced 
in  his  actions  by  love  and  wisdom,  through  the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  he  holds  the  keys,  but  no  further."  And 
the  same  principle  applies  to  indulgences  and  excommuni- 
cations. The  pope  cannot  release  a  person  from  any 
penalties  except  those  that  he  has  himself  imposed.  He  can- 
not by  any  exercise  of  his  power  exclude  a  person  from  com- 
munion with  God  or  with  other  Christians.  As  to  the 
statement,  "Whosesoever  sins  ye  remit,  etc."  it  means  no 
more  than  that  whatever  a  wise  and  faithful  priest  decides 
in  accordance  with  God's  judgment  he  will  find  ratified  in 
heaven — and  this  holds  true  of  the  decision  of  any  wise 


2i8  Wessel  Gansfort 

and  righteous  person,  who  acts  under  the  impulse  of 
love. 

Confession  and  the  sacraments  are  doubtless  means  by 
which  one  may  grow  in  grace,  but  they  are  not  essential 
to  such  growth,  as  is  illustrated  by  Paul  of  Thebes  and 
other  desert  saints  whose  isolation  prevented  them  from 
receiving  the  sacraments.  "The  Catholic  Church"  is 
not  confined  to  "the  faithful  Latins,"  nor  to  the  subjects 
of  the  pope.  It  includes  also  many  in  remote  places  who 
have  never  heard  of  Rome,  but  who  exercise  faith  and  love 
and  piety;  for  the  bond  of  unity  in  the  Church  is  not  the 
pope,  but  Christ  and  his  omnipresent  Spirit.  As  to  ex- 
communication, though  a  priest  may  exclude  a  person  from 
the  external  fellowship  of  the  Church,  "God  alone  can 
exclude  him  from  spiritual  communion  with  those  who  fear 
and  love  God." 

In  the  matter  of  penance,  the  position  is  taken  that,  as 
God  forgives  the  penitent  absolutely,  the  Church  should 
do  the  same,  and  not  require  submission  to  penitential 
discipline  as  the  condition  of  its  absolution.  God  is  not 
so  much  pleased  with  sorrow  for  past  sin  as  He  is  with  love 
and  joy  and  the  purpose  of  future  obedience.  These  are 
"the  works  meet  for  repentance."  Grief  has  no  moral 
merit  unless  it  proceed  from  love,  but  the  grief  imposed 
by  penitential  discipline  proceeds  from  apprehension  and 
hope  deferred.  The  psychological  effect  of  penance  is  to 
keep  the  penitent  forever  turning  over  in  his  mind  the 
sins  that  he  should  forget.  "The  angels  rejoice  over  the 
repentant  sinner,  but  the  Church  imposes  griefs  upon 
him. "  Christ  did  not  require  any  penance  of  Magdalene; 
he  said  to  her,  "  Go  in  peace. "  Nor  did  the  father  delay 
the  full  restoration  of  the  Prodigal  Son.  The  distinction 
between  the  temporal  and  the  eternal  penalties  of  sin  is 
utterly  fictitious.  The  Church,  by  the  exaction  of  pen- 
ance, not  only  detracts  from  God's  free  grace  to  the  return- 


Farrago  Rerum  Theologicarum         219 

ing  penitent,  but  exceeds  its  own  authority;  "for  the  priest 
no  more  judges  or  absolves  in  the  sacrament  of  confession 
than  he  purifies  in  the  sacrament  of  baptism." 

Being  opposed  to  all  penance,  Wessel  naturally  attacked 
the  system  of  indulgences.  An  indulgence  may  be  de- 
fined, from  one  standpoint,  as  a  remission  of  the  penance 
imposed  by  the  canons.  But  in  as  much  as  the  penitent 
may  die  with  his  penance  unperformed,  an  indulgence  may 
avail  to  end  or  shorten  his  stay  in  purgatory.  Some  com- 
pensation, however,  must  be  made  to  justice,  so  from  the 
Treasury  of  the  Church,  consisting  of  the  merits  of  Christ 
and  the  saints,  sufficient  merit  is  transferred  to  the  account 
of  the  penitent  to  cancel  his  indebtedness.  Such  in  bald- 
est form  is  the  theory  of  indulgences  and  to  it  at  every 
point  Wessel  offered  objection.  He  denied  that  there  was 
any  such  place  or  state  as  purgatory,  as  ordinarily  under- 
stood. As  for  the  Treasury  of  the  Church,  no  doubt  there 
is  an  enrichment  of  the  life  of  the  Church  through  its 
saints  and  sages,  but  these  are  the  gifts  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  the  pope  can  neither  appraise  nor  dispense  them,  nor 
can  he  know  the  need  and  spiritual  receptivity  of  the 
penitent .  ' '  To  give  plenary  indulgence  is  to  remove  every 
obstacle  to  the  beatific  vision";  this  requires  the  posses- 
sion of  perfect  love  and  purity,  which  God  alone  can 
impart. 


CONCERNING  THE  COMMUNION  OF  THE  SAINTS,  THE 
TREASURE  OF  THE  CHURCH,  ITS  SHARING  AND  DIS- 
PENSING,   BROTHERHOODS,    ETC. 

This  chapter  continues  the  discussion  of  the  Treasure  of 
the  Church,  but  from  a  new  standpoint,  since  emphasis  is 
here  placed  upon  the  communion  of  the  saints,  the  distri- 


220  Wessel  Gansfort 

bution  of  community  benefits  in  monastic  brotherhoods, 
and  endowed  masses.  That  communion  of  the  saints 
which  is  confessed  in  the  creed  is  thus  defined:  "All  the 
saints  share  in  a  true  and  essential  unity,  even  as  many  as 
unitedly  hold  fast  to  Christ  in  one  faith,  one  hope,  one 
love."  Thus  are  all  true  Christians  united,  regardless  of 
time  or  space  or  contentious  or  even  heretical  rulers.  To 
the  Treasury  of  the  Church  as  thus  unified,  every  worthy 
Christian  makes  some  contribution ;  and  in  its  treasures  all 
who  appreciate  them  share,  and  share  in  proportion  to 
their  love  and  desire  for  them.  The  only  way  by  which 
the  pope  or  any  one  else  can  admit  a  person  to  participa- 
tion in  these  treasures  is  by  awakening  in  his  heart  a 
love  and  desire  for  them.  And  if  one  possess  this  love  and 
desire,  the  pope  himself  cannot  exclude  him  from  partici- 
pation. St.  Peter,  the  first  pope,  in  his  inspired  Epistle 
issued  the  one  unique  and  indubitable  bull  regarding 
indulgences,  and  there  sets  forth  the  conditions  of 
plenary  admission  into  the  kingdom  of  God.  It  is 
by  "the  ladder  of  the  ten  steps,"  the  ten  virtues  enum- 
erated in  II  Peter  I,  5-7;  and  there  is  no  other  way  to 
enter. 

"The  communion  of  the  saints  is  a  fraternal  union  in 
God,  a  brotherhood,  and  he  shares  most  in  it,  who  has  the 
greatest  love  for  his  Father  and  his  brethren.  "  The  same 
is  true  of  those  who  endow  monastic  brotherhoods  or 
establish  foundations  for  the  celebration  of  masses.  God 
alone  can  estimate  the  extent  to  which  the  patrons  or 
others  shall  share  in  their  spiritual  benefits.  For  each 
shall  share  in  proportion  to  his  desire  for  them,  and  the 
increase  in  the  number  of  participants  shall  in  no  wise 
lessen  the  blessing  which  each  receives.  "A  devout  woman 
is  no  less  concerned  in  what  transpires  in  the  mass  than  is 
the  devout  priest,  since  she  shares  with  equal  piety  in  the 
body  and  blood."     For  the  prime  "requisite  for  the  effi- 


Farrago  Rerum  Theologicarum         221 

cacy  of  the  sacrament  is  a  hungering  and  thirsting  for  the 
life-giving  food  and  drink. " 

The  chapter  concludes  with  a  brief  discussion  of  the 
spiritual  value  of  monasticism.  "It  is  the  purpose  to 
have  unhindered  leisure  for  God  that  renders  the  celibate 
life  praiseworthy."  This  purpose  many  have  possessed 
who  were  so  circumstanced  in  life,  as  for  example  the 
patriarch  Abraham  and  Queen  Elizabeth  of  Hungary, 
that  celibacy  was  clearly  contrary  to  their  appointed 
duty.  These,  nevertheless,  have  the  spirit  and  so  the 
merit  of  the  celibate.  For  virginity  is  primarily  a  purity 
and  devotion  of  heart;  if  it  is  merely  of  the  body  it  is  of 
small  profit.  "Married  prelates  who  love  celibacy  even 
more  than  celibates  do  are  held  in  higher  honor  than  the 
latter  and  receive  the  greater  reward."  In  the  case  of 
those,  who  like  David  and  Magdalene  were  guilty  of  sins 
of  impurity,  the  cleansing  power  of  God's  grace  is  such 
that  after  repentance  they  may  become  as  pure  in  body 
and  heart  as  those  who  have  maintained  their  innocence, 
since  that  which  is  forgiven  by  God  is  as  if  it  had  never 
existed. 


VI 


CONCERNING  PURGATORY,  ITS  NATURE  AND  FIRE, 
THE  STATE  AND  PROGRESS  OF  SOULS  AFTER  THIS 
life;  the  TWO  commandments  OF  LOVE. 

This  final  chapter  deals  with  the  future  life,  and  more 
especially  with  purgatory.  It  contains  several  series  of 
propositions,  and  all  its  parts  are  but  loosely  articulated. 
Since  the  pope  claimed  the  power  to  grant  indulgences 
beneficial  to  those  in  purgatory,  the  discussion  begins  with 
a  statement  of  his  fallibility  in  judgment  and  his  inability 
to  enable  any  one  to  keep  the  "two  commandments  of 


222  Wessel  Gansfort 

love"  on  which  all  depends.  His  power  is  confined  to 
"administering  the  sacraments,  warning,  teaching,  in- 
fluencing, directing,  and  edifying  by  word  and  example." 
"God  has  reserved  to  himself  the  decision  in  all  matters 
that  concern  a  man's  relation  to  him. "  The  pope,  there- 
fore, has  no  authority  to  pardon  sin,  which  is  an  offense 
against  God,  or  to  relax  the  punishment  which  God  has 
appointed.  In  the  application  of  the  Treasure  of  the 
Church,  also,  it  is  God  alone  who  can  determine  what  the 
share  of  each  should  be,  since  he  alone  knows  the  hearts  of 
men. 

Purgatory,  from  which  it  was  taught  that  indulgences 
would  secure  release,  is  the  intermediate  state  between 
this  life  and  the  final  condition  of  perfect  love  and  blessed- 
ness— the  beatific  vision  of  God.  Wessel  insists,  however, 
that  it  is  not  a  state  of  punishment  for  past  sins.  It  is 
rather  a  place  of  joy  and  of  increasing  knowledge  and  love. 
Man  is  there  still  a  "wayfarer,"  and  is  gradually  passing 
out  of  the  light  of  the  day  star  and  the  dawn  and  sunrise 
into  the  perfect  day.  Purgatory  is  the  "paradise"  into 
which  the  repentant  thief  entered  at  once  with  Christ. 
Its  only  fire  is  the  purifying  flame  of  love  for  Christ;  and 
its  only  suffering  the  deferment  of  perfect  love  and  union 
with  Christ,  the  soul's  Bridegroom.  It  is  a  mistake  to 
suppose  that  there  is,  per  se,  any  cleansing  efficacy  in 
suffering.  Otherwise,  those  who  suffer  the  pains  of  hell 
would  be  the  most  pure  of  all  God's  creatures.  Those  in 
purgatory  are  "in  a  state,  not  wretched,  not  under  the 
rod  of  a  lictor  nor  in  the  fire  prepared  for  the  devil  and  his 
angels,  but  under  the  instruction  of  the  Father,  who 
established  this  state  and  rejoices  in  their  daily  progress. " 

That  the  fire  of  purgatory  is  generally  regarded  as  penal 
and  material  is  due  to  the  figurative  language  of  the  Scrip- 
tures adopted  by  the  Church's  teachers,  and  also  to  a 
providential    misapprehension    of    its    meaning    by    the 


Farrago  Rerum  Theologicarum         223 

multitude,  who  may  be  deterred  from  evil  ways  by  the 
fear  of  material  fire  and  corporeal  punishment.  But 
purgator}'-  is  in  reality  a  place  of  enjoyment,  since  Christ 
there  reveals  himself  more  fully  to  his  followers  than  in 
this  life,  and  by  the  increasing  love  of  Him  which  comes 
with  increasing  knowledge  prepares  them  for  the  perfect 
enjoyment  of  God.  The  perplexing  passage  in  the  First 
Epistle  of  St.  Peter  in  which  Christ  is  represented  as  hav- 
ing preached  to  spirits  in  prison  is  made  to  support  this 
conception  of  purgatory.  Christ  is  "the  great  Evangel- 
ist" to  purgatory.  There  he  preaches  "the  Eternal  Gos- 
pel," not  to  imperfect  Christians  only,  but  to  the 
antediluvians,  to  those  of  Old  Testament  times,  and  to 
the  heathen.  Thus  every  man  either  in  this  life  or  the 
next  will  have  opportunity  to  hear  his  voice  and  accept 
him. 

In  the  series  of  propositions  concerning  the  Eternal 
Gospel  a  glimpse  is  given  into  a  wide  field  of  speculation 
in  which  it  appears  that  Wessel,  who  had  the  optimism  of 
those  who  magnify  the  divine  sovereignty,  was  willing  to 
follow  in  the  direction  taken  centuries  before  by  Origen. 
"The  purpose  of  God  has  not  been  frustrated  with  the 
result  that  he  who  wishes  all  men  to  be  saved  v;ould 
forget  or  abandon  his  work!"  In  the  future  life  under 
more  favorable  conditions,  with  Christ  himself  as  the 
Evangelist,  the  Eternal  Gospel  (the  message  of  God's 
saving  purpose  in  its  simplest,  most  elemental,  most  uni- 
versal, most  persuasive  form)  will  be  preached  to  all  those 
who  have  not  rejected  Christ  or  such  light  as  they  had  in 
this  life.  This  is  not  universalism,  nor  second  probation 
in  its  ordinary  sense ;  but  it  nevertheless  opens  a  wide  door 
of  hope  for  the  salvation  of  the  race.  Concerning  prayers 
for  the  dead,  which  he  did  not  wish  offered  on  his  own 
behalf,  he  intimates  that  they  may  constitute  a  form  of 
profitable  meditation,  that  is,  they  may  react  helpfully 


224  Wessel  Gansfort 

upon  the  suppliant,  "since  it  is  holy  and  profitable  to  wish 
what  God  wishes" ;  yet  he  offers  no  reason  to  suppose  that 
prayers  on  their  behalf  will  affect  the  condition  of  the 
departed. 


The  Letters 


"  I  am  sending  you,  most  excellent  Sir,  the  Homilies  of  John  Chrysos- 
tom,  which  I  trust  you  will  read  with  delight,  since  golden  words  have  ^ 
always  pleased  you  more  than  golden  coin." 

Alexander  Hegius'  Letter  to  Wessel 


VOL.  I— IS  225 


TRANSLATOR'S  PREFACE 

The  translation  that  follows  has  been  made  with  the  use 
of  three  different  copies  of  Wessel's  works  in  the  original 
Latin.  Of  these,  the  one  that  has  every  appearance  of 
being  the  oldest  consists  of  four  separate  pamphlets  bound 
in  a  single  volume.  First  in  order  comes  what  is  generally 
considered  to  be  the  earliest  edition  of  the  Farrago.  It  bears 
no  date,  nor  is  there  any  clue  to  the  name  of  the  printer 
or  to  the  place  of  printing.  Attached  to  this  are  Wessel's 
letters  to  Bernard  of  Meppen,  to  "a  certain  man,"  to 
John  of  Amsterdam,  and  lastly  his  briefer  letter  to  Hoeck. 
The  second  pamphlet  presents  Wessel's  De  Oratione 
Dominica  in  full.  The  third  contains  his  De  Sacramento 
Eucharistiae,  followed  by  extracts  from  De  Magnitudine 
Passionis  and  De  Incarnatione  Verhi.  The  fourth,  which 
is  prefaced  by  Luther's  commendatory  letter,  consists  of 
Wessel's  letter  to  Engelbert  of  Leyden,  Hoeck's  letter  to 
Wessel,  the  latter's  long  reply  to  Hoeck,  his  letter  to 
Gertrude  Reyniers,  John  of  Amsterdam's  letter  to  Bernard 
of  Meppen,  and  Wessel's  letter  to  Ludolph  van  Veen.  Last 
of  all  according  to  the  title-page  should  come  Anthony  de 
Castro's  attack  on  the  positions  regarding  indulgences  that 
Wessel  had  taken  in  his  long  letter  to  Hoeck.  But  by  an 
error  in  the  binding,  to  which  attention  is  called  in  a  note 
by  the  publisher,  it  appears  immediately  after  the  De 
Oratione  Dominica. 

The  type,  the  initial  letters,  the  abbreviations,  and  the 
orthography  of  the  four  sections  of  this  volume  clearly 
indicate  that  they  were  all  printed  by  the  same  publishing- 

227 


228  Wessel  Gansfort 

house.  The  first  pamphlet,  however,  exists  as  a  separate 
booklet,  which,  as  stated  above,  is  believed  to  antedate 
all  other  editions  of  Wessel's  works.  It  is  altogether 
probable,  therefore,  that  the  three  following  pamphlets 
were  issued  separately  from  the  same  press,  but  not  till 
after  the  appearance  of  the  Adam  Petri  edition  described 
below,  and  were  then  bound  up  with  the  first  pamphlet. 
The  British  Museum  Catalogue  describes  in  detail  a 
copy  of  Wessel's  works  that  is  identical  in  contents  with 
this  volume. 

The  second  text  used  in  the  translation  was  printed  by 
Adam  Petri  at  Basel  in  1522.  It  contains  all  the  treatises 
and  letters  found  in  the  first  and  fourth  pamphlets  men- 
tioned above  with  the  exception  of  Anthony  de  Castro's 
Impugnatorium,  and  closes  with  a  letter  from  the  pubUsher 
to  Dr.  Conrad  Faber. 

The  third  volume  in  the  hands  of  the  translator  was 
a  copy  of  the  complete  edition  of  Wessel's  surviving  works, 
pubHshed  by  Peter  Pappus  at  Groningen  in  1614.  This  is 
the  only  edition  that  contains  the  Scala  Meditationis 
and  Hardenberg's  biography  of  Wessel.  The  latter  as 
being  the  most  valuable  source  of  information  concerning 
the  life  of  Wessel  has  been  included  in  the  translation  and 
follows  the  Farrago. 

The  textual  variations  in  these  three  editions,  which  are 
collated  in  the  Critical  Appendix,  are  relatively  few  and 
for  the  most  part  unimportant.  Whenever  practicable 
the  reading  of  the  earliest  edition  has  been  given  prefer- 
ence to  either  of  the  others. 

In  addition  to  the  letters  already  mentioned,  the  trans- 
lation includes  Wessel's  letter  to  "a  nameless  nun"  and 
Alexander  Hegius'  letter  to  Wessel,  which  are  found  only  in 
the  1 614  edition,  and  also  a  letter  from  David  of  Burgundy 
to  Wessel,  quoted  by  Muurling  in  his  Commentatio  de 
Wesseli  Vita. 


Translator's  Preface  229 

The  translator's  aim  has  been  to  render  the  Latin  with 
Hteral  exactness  and  to  reproduce  the  style  of  the  author 
as  far  as  possible  without  sacrificing  the  English  idiom, 
hoping  thereby  to  place  the  reader,  to  some  degree,  on  an 
equality  with  those  who  have  access  to  the  original.  To 
attain  this  end,  time  and  labor  have  been  given  without 
stint.  During  the  five  years  that  have  elapsed  since  the 
translation  was  undertaken,  it  has  passed  through  no  less 
than  four  revisions  at  the  hands  of  the  translator  and  the 
editor. 

Classical  scholars  might  naturally  suppose  that  peculiar 
difficulties  would  be  attached  to  the  translation  of  Wessel's 
medieval  Latin.  Such,  however,  has  not  been  the  case. 
While  Wessel's  Latinity  is  by  no  means  Ciceronian,  it  is 
tolerably  pure,  as  is  evidenced  by  the  fact  that  scarcely 
more  than  a  score  of  words  in  the  Farrago  are  missing  in 
Harper's  Latin  Dictionary.  The  chief  difficulty  in  the 
translation  was  due  to  the  occurrence  of  various  technical 
terms  pertaining  to  the  Scholastic  philosophy.  Many 
such  terms,  though  still  employed  in  modern  philosophical 
treatises,  have  undergone  a  subtle  change  of  meaning.  In 
a  few  instances,  in  order  to  guard  against  any  possible  mis- 
apprehension, the  Latin  words  have  been  inserted  in 
parentheses.  Of  the  other  difficulties  incident  to  the 
translation  one  deserves  special  mention,  namely,  the 
identification  of  obscure  persons  and  places.  These 
abound  in  the  Introduction  to  the  Groningen  edition  and 
more  particularly  in  Hardenberg's  sketch  of  Wessel's  life 
and  writings. 

Primarily  Wessel  was  a  theologian  not  an  essayist,  a 
disputant  and  not  a  rhetorician.  Like  Augustine,  he  was 
so  deeply  absorbed  in  the  religious  controversies  of  his 
time  that  he  gave  scant  heed  to  rhetorical  embellishment. 
His  was  the  argumentative  style  of  the  day,  marked  by 
much  repetition  and  hard  hammering  on  the  positions  of 


230  Wessel  Gansfort 

his  opponent.  Nevertheless  it  would  be  doing  Wessel 
injustice  to  give  the  reader  the  impression  that  he  was 
nothing  more  than  a  vigorous  theological  disputant.  In 
the  perusal  of  his  writings  one  cannot  fail  to  see  emerging, 
clear  in  line  and  color,  the  portrait  of  a  man  unusually- 
keen  and  logical,  an  omnivorous  reader,  a  thorough  student 
of  philosophy,  an  independent  and  courageous  thinker, 
and  above  all,  an  unswerving  seeker  after  the  truth,  no 
matter  whither  the  search  for  it  might  lead  him.  As  a 
torch-bearer  in  the  darkness  of  the  Pre-Reformation 
Period,  he  deserved,  in  no  small  measure,  to  be  called — as 
he  was  by  some  of  his  contemporaries — ''Lux  Mundi." 

Grateful  acknowledgment  of  indebtedness  should  be 
made  to  Mr.  A.  J.  F.  van  Laer,  Archivist  of  the  Division  of 
History  and  Archives  in  the  New  York  State  Education 
Department  for  valuable  assistance  in  identifying  many 
persons  and  localities  in  the  Netherlands;  to  Dr.  Julius 
A.  Bewer  of  Union  Theological  Seminary  for  interpreting 
certain  Hebrew  expressions  found  in  De  Sacramento 
Eucharistiae;  and  to  Professors  Charles  E.  Durham  and 
George  L.  Burr  of  Cornell  University  for  throwing  light 
upon  several  obscure  passages.  Particularly  is  the  trans- 
lator under  deep  obligation  to  the  editor  of  these  volumes, 
to  whose  keen  criticism  and  constant  collaboration  what- 
ever merit  the  translation  possesses  is  largely  due. 


Jared  W.  Scudder. 


Albany,  N.  Y., 
October,  1916. 


MARTIN  LUTHER  IN  A  LETTER   PREFACING  CERTAIN  MINOR 
WORKS  OF  WESSEL 

Martin  Luther  gives  greeting  to  the  Christian  Reader. 

Once,  when  the  word  of  the  Lord  was  precious  and  there 
was  no  open  vision,  and  the  prophets  had  been  slain  al- 
most to  a  man  by  the  wicked  Jezebel,  the  prophet  Elijah, 
the  Tishbite,  thought  that  he  only  was  left.  Therefore, 
weary  of  life,  he  wished  to  die ;  being  alone,  he  felt  unequal 
to  the  task  of  bearing  the  intolerable  burden  of  his  wicked 
people  and  their  leaders.  For  he  did  not  know  that  seven 
thousand  men  were  still  left  to  the  Lord,  and  that  Obadiah 
was  safe  with  one  hundred  prophets  in  hiding. 

This,  if  I  may  compare  the  small  with  the  great,  seems 
to  me  to  be  a  parable  of  our  own  age.  For  I,  being  forced 
through  some  providence  of  God  into  the  public  arena, 
felt  that  I  was  alone  in  my  fight  with  these  monsters  of 
indulgences  and  pontifical  laws  and  so-called  theology. 
And  yet  I  have  always  had  sufficient  courage  to  cause  me 
to  be  accused  everywhere  of  being  too  biting  and  unre- 
strained, because  of  the  great  faith  with  which  I  was 
burning.  Still  I  always  desired  to  be  taken  away — even 
I — from  the  midst  of  my  Baalites,  and  escaping  my  civic 
obligations,  to  live  to  myself  in  some  corner,  in  utter  de- 
spair of  being  able  to  accomplish  anything  against  the 
brazen  foreheads  and  iron  necks  of  impiety. 

But  lo!  word  comes  to  me  that  the  Lord  has  saved  a 
remnant  even  at  this  time,  and  that  His  prophets  are  safe 

231 


232  Wessel  Gansfort 

in  hiding.  And  this  is  not  only  told  me,  but  to  my  joy 
it  is  proven  to  me.  For  behold!  a  Wessel  has  appeared, 
whom  they  call  Basil,  a  Frisian  from  Groningen,  a  man  of 
remarkable  ability  and  of  rare  and  great  spirit;  and  it  is 
evident  that  he  has  been  truly  taught  of  the  Lord,  even  as 
Esaias  prophesied  the  Christians  would  be.  For  no  one 
could  think  that  he  received  these  doctrines  from  men, 
any  more  than  I  mine.  If  I  had  read  his  works  earlier, 
my  enemies  might  think  that  Luther  had  absorbed  every- 
thing from  Wessel,  his  spirit  is  so  in  accord  with  mine. 

But  now  my  joy  and  courage  begin  to  increase,  and  I 
have  not  the  slightest  doubt  that  I  have  been  teaching  the 
truth,  since  he,  living  at  so  different  a  time,  under  another 
sky,  in  another  land,  and  under  such  diverse  circumstances, 
is  so  consistently  in  accord  with  me  in  all  things,  not  only 
as  to  substance,  but  in  the  use  of  almost  the  same  words. 

I  wonder,  however,  what  ill  fortune  has  prevented  this 
most  Christian  author  from  being  widely  read.  Possibly 
it  was  because  he  lived  free  from  blood  and  war,  in  which 
particular  alone  he  differs  from  me.  Or  he  may  have 
been  overwhelmed  by  fear  of  our  Jews  who  with  their 
wicked  inquisitions  seem  to  have  been  born  for  the  pur- 
pose of  pronouncing  all  the  best  books  heretical,  in  order 
that  their  own  Aristotelian  and  hypercritical  writers  may 
be  set  forth  as  Christian.  But  through  the  deliverance 
of  God  they  are  now  ending  in  confusion. 

Therefore  peruse  his  works,  pious  reader;  and  read  with 
discernment.  For  in  discernment  hes  his  special  excel- 
lence; this  he  displays  to  a  remarkable  degree.  And 
those  who  are  offended  by  excessive  harshness  in  me  or  by 
too  great  elegance  of  style  in  others,  will  have  nothing  to 
complain  of  here.  His  style  is  unpolished,  in  accordance 
with  his  age,  while  he  treats  his  subject  with  moderation 
and  fidelity.  If  Vergil  found  gold  in  the  dungheaps  of 
Ennius,  the  reader  of  our  Wessel  will  discover  how  a 


Letter  from  Martin  Luther  233 

theologian  may  adorn  his  writings  with  the  riches  of  elo- 
quence. 

May  the  Lord  Jesus  add  many  other  Basils  to  this  one. 

Farewell,  Christian  brother. 
Wittenberg,  the  IVth  day  before  the  Kalends  of  August. 


II 


ADAM  PETRI  SENDS  GREETINGS  TO  DOCTOR  CONRAD  FABER, 
WHO  REFLECTS  HONOR  UPON  THEOLOGIANS,  AND  IN- 
DEED UPON  ALL  LEARNED  MEN 

Behold,  most  learned  sir,  what  an  author  certain 
persons  have  put  out  of  the  way!  And  the  reason  for  it 
is  clear.  But  God,  who  sets  bounds  to  the  fury  of  the  un- 
godly, just  as  he  does  to  the  waves  of  the  sea,  did  not  allow 
his  works  to  perish  utterly. 

What,  I  ask,  have  you  ever  seen,  except  the  Books  of  the 
Bible,  as  they  are  called,  that  sets  forth  the  whole  work  of 
Christ  and  the  Scriptures  with  clearer  proofs,  or  fights 
against  those  impostors,  the  enemies  of  God  with  stronger 
arguments?  What  have  you  seen  that  is  more  effective 
in  shaking  human  traditions  and  driving  them  into  ob- 
scurity? And  there  is  no  surer  proof  than  this  that  his 
work  is  from  God.  For  man-made  doctrines  inevitably 
beget  disbelief  of  Christ  as  the  Word  of  God.  But  when 
the  sun  rises,  all  other  stars  hide  themselves. 

Therefore  I  would  especially  desire  him  to  be  read  by 
those  who  become  pufifed  up  with  their  wisdom  and  learn- 
ing and  then  proceed  to  mould  the  life  of  Christians  by 
their  philosophical  reasoning; — those,  I  say,  to  whom  in 
theology  all  deference  is  paid  to-day  in  almost  the  entire 
world,  I  usually  liken  such  men  to  swallows  and  mice, 
which,  although  they  are  domestic  and  seem  tame,  can- 
not be  tamed.  For  I  have  seen  that  it  is  impossible  for 
them  truly  to  know  Christ  on  account  of  the  riches,  so  to 

234 


Adam  Petri  to  Conrad  Faber  235 

speak,  of  their  learning  or  sanctity,  which  are  much  harder 
to  renounce  than  material  wealth,  because  they  cling  more 
closely  to  us.  And  yet  these  men  are  commonly  regarded 
as  great  theologians.  Indeed  their  false  doctrine  at  first 
sight  is  not  far  removed  from  the  truth  either  in  appear- 
ance or  name;  just  as  the  Styx  fountain  does  not  differ 
from  other  waters  in  odor  or  color;  yet  to  drink  of  it  means 
death.  Nevertheless,  if  they  will  only  read  this  author, 
I  have  hope  that  he  will  prove  convincing  along  all  lines, 
he  penetrates  so  deeply  into  the  nature  of  things,  human 
and  divine.  Otherwise,  I  can  but  imagine  how  much  men 
of  this  sort  will  hinder  Christ.  For  although  they  are 
learned,  they  have  not  as  yet  gained  firm  footing  on  the 
outer  threshold. 

But  further,  I  would  wish  him  to  be  read  by  those  who 
— destitute  of  love  and  puffed  up  with  knowledge — offend 
the  "little  ones"  in  Christ  by  speaking  rashly  on  subjects 
which  never  ought  to  be  generally  discussed ;  and  thereby 
do  very  great  harm  to  the  Church  of  Christ.  They  are 
like  trees  in  a  garden  which  hinder  others  by  their  too 
luxuriant  branches.  To  these  Christ  said — Matt,  xviii 
and  Mark  ix — "It  is  better  to  have  thy  hand  cut  off  and 
enter  into  life  maimed,  to  have  thy  foot  cut  off  and  enter 
halt,  or  to  have  thine  eye  plucked  out  and  enter  with  one 
eye,  than  to  be  cast  whole  into  hell  fire. " 

Therefore,  just  as  we  have  a  living  example  of  Christian 
earnestness  and  moderation  in  yourself,  we  have — so  to 
speak — a  similar  glorified  example  in  Wessel.  Indeed  it 
is  on  this  very  account — endowed  as  you  yourself  are  with 
every  theological  gift — that  you  have  deemed  him  worthy 
to  be  called  "The  greatest  theologian. " 

Farewell  in  God. 


Ill 


A  LETTER  OF  MASTER  WESSEL  TO  THE  HONORABLE  LORD 
MASTER  LUDOLPH  VAN  VEEN,  MOST  WORTHY  DEAN  OF 
THE  CELEBRATED  CHURCH  AT  UTRECHT  AND  DOCTOR 
OF  BOTH  LAWS 

It  is  not  this  time  because  of  the  agreement  that  exists 
between  us,  but  because  the  fires  are  almost  blazing  around 
me,  that  I  am  impelled  not  merely  to  write,  but  to  consult 
and  importune  you,  as  a  lawyer  and  a  faithful  friend ;  and 
also  as  one  who  in  early  youth  was  harassed  by  like — nay 
more  truly  by  the  same — misfortunes  and  conflicts  as 
those  by  which  I  fear  I  shall  now  be  troubled ;  for  experi- 
ence makes  one  particularly  wise  in  counsel. 

You  have  heard  of  the  peril  of  that  venerable  man, 
Master  John  of  Wesel.  Now,  although — as  you  have 
heard  me  say  repeatedly — I  do  not  like  his  absurdities, 
which  deviate  from  the  truth  and  are  a  stumbling  block 
to  the  people;  yet  his  learning  and  unusually  keen  facul- 
ties are  such  that  I  cannot  help  loving  the  man  and  sym- 
pathizing with  him  in  his  misfortune.  Oh,  what  an 
advantage  it  would  have  been  to  him,  as  I  often  said  inter 
nos  at  Paris,  if  he  had  first  been  trained  thoroughly,  as  we 
were,  in  the  studies  both  of  the  Realists  and  the  Formal- 
ists !  For  in  that  case  he  would  not  have  been  incautious 
and  off  his  guard,  but  as  though  from  a  citadel  and  watch- 
tower  he  would  have  foreseen  the  coming  assaults. 

From  my  most  faithful  friends  I  learn  that  he  has  been 
convicted  to  die  by  fire.     This  may  be  incorrect,  since  he, 

236 


Wessel's  Letter  to  Van  Veen  237 

being  convicted  in  a  disputation,  now  acknowledges  his 
error;  and  hence  it  follows  either  that  he  was  not  stubborn, 
or  if  he  was,  that  he  has  ceased  to  be  so.  I  am  not  so 
much  surprised  at  his  being  condemned  to  the  fire;  but 
I  think  the  methods  pursued  by  his  judges  ought  to  be 
laughed  to  scorn.  However,  perhaps,  as  some  say,  he  was 
convicted  because  he  did  not  confess;  or  possibly  was 
both  impudent  and  obstinate  in  manner,  or  possibly — to 
extenuate  the  offense  of  a  most  friendly  man — he  merely 
defended  some  error,  and  was  therefore  condemned  by  the 
judges  in  accordance  with  the  rules  of  the  Sacred  Canons. 

Be  that  as  it  may,  I  am  nevertheless  grieved  at  the  fate 
of  the  man,  and  especially  of  such  a  man  as  he  is.  I  have 
often  feared  his  inconsiderate  and  rash  manner  of  speech. 
For  although  his  teaching  had  some  scholastic  subtlety 
and  possibly  at  times  contained  some  catholic  truth,  yet 
to  make  such  statements  as  he  did  to  the  unlearned  crowd 
and  to  those  who  were  incapable  of  understanding  them 
caused  serious  scandal  to  simple  minded  people  and  was 
altogether  odious. 

Besides,  from  the  same  friends  I  learn  that  as  soon  as 
the  inquisitor  has  disposed  of  him,  he  will  descend  with  an 
investigation  upon  me.  And  in  this  case,  although  I  do 
not  fear  the  proceedings  in  the  least,  still  I  should  have 
to  endure  disquietude,  suspicion,  expense,  trouble,  and — 
more  than  that — even  calumny;  especially  from  the  Abbot 
of  the  Old  Mount  and  from  some  Doctors  of  Cologne, 
whose  hatred  or  rather  whose  envy  you  may  readily 
guess  from  your  own  misfortunes, — I  speak  to  one  who  has 
had  experience  with  them.  And  so  that  I  may  pass 
through  their  persecutions — if  they  ever  attempt  them — as 
over  a  shallow  ford  and  with  light  step,  I  await  your  ad- 
vice in  regard  to  expecting  and  undergoing  them.  I  am 
looking  however  for  as  speedy  a  reply  as  possible  from  you 
with  an  account  of  what  happened  to  you  in  a  similar 


238  Wessel  Gansfort 

affair  and  what  you  would  advise  me  to  do,  for  fear  that 
some  sudden  attack  may  confound  me  in  my  defenseless- 
ness  and  ignorance  of  court  trials.  I  beg  of  you  to  make 
reply  to  me  quickly,  in  order  that  you  may  abundantly 
refresh  one  who  thirsts  for  your  advice  and  who  trusts  no 
less  to  the  wisdom  of  your  counsels  than  to  the  justice  of 
his  cause.  I  do  not  fear  anything  that  I  may  have  tol 
undergo  for  the  purity  of  the  faith,  if  only  there  be  no 
calumny.  As  I  have  revealed  these  matters  to  you  in 
confidence,  conceal  them,  I  entreat  you,  from  all  others. 
Written  at  Zwolle  on  the  6th  of  April. 


IV 


WESSEL  OF  GRONINGEN  SENDS  GREETING  IN  JESUS,  THE 
TRUE  SAVIOUR,  TO  THE  HONORABLE  AND  DEVOUT 
SISTER,  THE  MAIDEN,  GERTRUDE  REYNIERS,  NUN  AT 
KLAARWATER 

You  inquire  about  a  certain  ghost  which  is  the  subject 
of  much  talk  among  the  people.  Assertions  of  this  kind 
should  not  be  regarded  as  important  by  serious-minded 
hearers.  Concerning  such  matters  much  is  written  and 
related  that  is  foreign  to  the  Gospel  and  the  Sacred  Canon. 
But  even  if  an  angel  from  heaven  were  to  come  and  report 
anything  opposed  to  that  which  in  permanent  form  has 
been  handed  down  to  us,  it  ought  not  to  be  accepted. 

You  have  read,  I  suppose,  of  that  Doctor,  a  theologian 
of  Paris,  who  came  back  from  the  dead.  When  he  was 
asked  what  was  left  of  his  once  splendid  knowledge,  he 
replied  that  he  knew  nothing  but  punishment.  This 
story  and  others  like  it  that  have  been  recorded  seem  to 
be  confirmed  by  the  fact  that  his  statement  agrees  with 
Solomon's  words  in  the  Sacred  Canon,  "For  there  is  no 
work,  nor  device,  nor  knowledge,  in  the  grave."  Indeed 
from  this  one  would  naturally  conclude  that  no  rational 
cognition  is  assured  there.  But  this  is  obviously  contrary 
to  theological  truth  concerning  the  most  holy  and  clear 
cognition  of  souls  there.  For  Scripture  repeatedly  says, 
"The  ungodly  shall  see  and  know  that  he  is  God. "  Like- 
wise the  Lord  Jesus,  when  he  comes  to  judge,  will  receive 
an  account  of  every  idle  word  in  the  presence  of  all  and 

239 


240  Wessel  Gansfort 

his  judgment  will  be  as  clear  as  the  noonday.  The  Apostle 
also  says  the  Lord  Jesus  was  given  a  name  above  every 
name,  that  in  his  name  the  knee  even  of  those  under  the 
earth  should  bow.  Hence  the  spirits  in  the  lower  world 
have  a  name  for  all  things,  but  above  all  the  name  of 
Jesus,  and — bitterest  of  all  for  them — that  name  so  exalted 
that  they  know  it  is  brighter  than  the  noonday  light,  and 
are  forced  to  admit  that  the  Lord  Jesus,  whom  they  all 
hate  and  envy  most  fiercely,  is  in  the  glory  of  God  the 
Father. 

Therefore,  as  a  rule  I  regard  such  revelations  and  visions 
as  dangerous  and  illusory,  unless  they  are  tempered  and 
qualified  with  a  large  grain  of  salt.  For  what  revelation 
have  they  ever  made  of  the  hidden  wisdom,  upon  which 
piety  and  love  may  be  clearly  and  surely  built?  They 
commend  the  piety,  alms,  pilgrimages,  fastings,  and  pray- 
ers of  the  people.  But  these  are  also  commended  by  the 
Sacred  Canon.  The  fact  is  that  the  Gospel  has  grown  so 
old  to  us  that  we  believe  some  one  who  returns  and  brings 
us  tidings  of  the  dead  rather  than  the  prophets  and  Moses, 
rather  even  than  the  apostles  and  evangelists.  Such  was 
the  opinion  and  judgment  of  the  rich  banqueter  in  the 
lower  world  after  his  burial.  For  he  thought  that  the 
living  would  believe,  if  one  from  the  dead  went  and  testi- 
fied to  them.  Abraham,  however,  clearly  opposed  this, 
saying  that  if  they  would  not  believe  Moses  and  the 
prophets,  neither  would  they  believe,  if  one  went  from  the 
dead.  You  have  therefore,  an  opinion  on  these  matters 
expressed,  not  by  myself,  but  by  Abraham,  by  the  Lord 
Jesus.  As  a  rule,  trifling,  curious,  prurient  hearers  are 
more  excited  by  the  novelty  of  such  an  idea  than  they  are 
aroused  by  the  truth  of  the  Gospel,  as  they  are  vagrants 
by  nature,  idle  and  garrulous  rather  than  industrious 
and  fruitful. 

And  yet  I  do  not  on  this  account  reject  revelations  and 


Letter  to  Gertrude  Reyniers  241 

visions  that  harmonize  with  the  truth  and  conduce  to 
piety.  Not  as  if  they  constituted  the  hinge  or  anchor  of 
faith;  but  on  the  same  ground  that  I  hold  that  writings 
outside  of  the  Canon  may  be  read  unto  edification.  In 
most  such  visions  however  we  must  not  ignore  the  astute- 
ness of  the  angel  Satan,  who  transforms  himself  into  an 
angel  of  light.  Serious  men  should  gravely  suspect  that 
he  is  concerned  in  all  such  accounts.  For  he  often  includes 
much  that  is  true,  in  order  that  he  may  stealthily  inweave 
a  single  falsehood.  As  it  is,  it  seems  to  me  that  this  has 
been  his  business  among  you,  for  instead  of  recognizing 
that  redeemed  souls  released  from  this  body  of  sin  by  the 
death  that  is  precious  in  the  Lord  have  already  opened  the 
door  to  the  Son  of  man  coming  at  the  appointed  time  as 
though  to  their  bridegroom,  and  have  longingly  received 
him,  faithfully  espoused  themselves  to  him,  and  are  ar- 
dently clinging  to  him,  such  visitations  imply  that  the 
dead  still  weaken  and  retard  their  progress  by  concerning 
themselves  with  our  infirmities  and  worthlessness. 

With  regard  to  the  study  of  logic,  I  do  not  deny  that  it 
contributes  to  scholastic  discipline.  But  I  do  not  see 
what  it  adds  to  the  consolation  of  monastic  solitude  and 
spiritual  exaltation,  especially  in  the  case  of  maidens  like 
yourself.  As  a  rule  it  has  been  given  to  your  entire  sex 
to  glow  with  eager  longing  rather  than  to  be  distinguished 
for  judgment  or  discernment.  Hence  I  think  the  high- 
est logic  for  you  consists  in  prayer.  For  the  promise, 
"Seek  and  ye  shall  find,"  has  not  been  given  in  vain  to 
you.  Long  before  you  could  learn  logic,  you  will  have 
prevailed  through  the  prayer  of  faith  with  the  Teacher  of 
truth  to  grant  you  all  needful  truth.  It  is  not  expedient 
that  the  eye  of  the  guileless  dove  be  confused  by  too  many 
things.  They  that  too  curiously  consider  the  things  that 
stand  about  their  pathway,  press  on  to  the  end  the  more 
,  slowly.     Acquire  love  through  prayer,  and  you  will  have 

VOL.  I — 16 


242  Wessel  Gansfort 

obtained  all  the  fruit  of  logic,  i.  e.  knowledge  and  wisdom. 
Chaste  maidens  who  are  betrothed  to  the  Lord  Jesus,  the 
supreme,  the  inestimable  lover,  and  are  at  the  last  to  show 
themselves  not  having  spot  or  wrinkle,  should  seek  no 
other  logic  than  faithful  love,  which  in  this  life  is  granted 
to  but  few,  indeed  to  very  few.  For  all  who  pant  for 
that  true  wedding  I  think  that  logic  is  less  useful  than  to 
coo  and  call  constantly  with  the  dove  in  the  crannies  of 
the  rock,  to  knock  at  the  ears  of  their  good  and  great 
lover,  in  order  that  by  the  sacrifice  of  their  love  he  may 
make  them  worthy  of  his  love.  For  if  they  do  not  love 
when  he  comes,  he  will  exclude  them  as  anathema.  The 
love  of  Jesus  is  a  wedding  ring,  without  which  every 
betrothed  maiden  will  be  deemed  unworthy  of  the  mar- 
riage chamber. 

To  meditate  on  this,  to  esteem  it,  to  pant  for  it,  to 
hunger  and  thirst  for  it,  to  seek  it  with  inmost  longing,  I 
think  will  be  the  highest  logical  wisdom  possible  to  us 
here  in  the  light  of  the  lamp.  To  speak  figuratively, 
just  as  the  Scholastics  approach  philosophy  through  logic, 
so  through  prayers  and  groans  and  pious  sighs  all  be- 
trothed maidens  have  a  straight,  easy,  and  sure  path  to  the 
highest  wisdom  of  nuptial  glory. 

I  am  very  much  pleased  with  your  progress  in  the  study 
of  literature,  but  only  as  I  see  that  it  leads  more  expedi- 
tiously to  your  holy  wedding  since  all  your  sighing  for  it 
now,  as  your  mind  broadens,  shall  like  sparks  be  changed 
into  spheres  and  vast  globes  of  glowing  love.  No  one 
can  be  considered  to  live,  who  does  not  love.  For  luke- 
warmness,  like  sleep,  is  the  image  of  death,  and  he  only 
lives  completely  who  loves  completely;  he  alone  is  happy 
who,  having  obtained  his  desire,  loves  worthily. 

The  haste  of  my  messenger  constrains  me  to  shorten 
this  letter.  I  beg  you  to  commend  me  most  cordially  to 
the  holy  mother,  Elithia.     Farewell. 


LETTER   TO   A    NAMELESS   NUN 

To  his  sister  of  the  Convent,  Wessel  sends  cordial  greet- 
ings in  Jesus'  love.  I  cannot  tell  you  with  what  joy  I  was 
filled,  when  by  your  letter  I  saw  that  you  were  girded  with 
such  courage  for  the  battle,  ready  even  to  give  up  your 
life  for  Christ.  For,  indeed,  this  is  the  way  by  which  a 
soul  enters  upon  life  eternal,  provided  it  enters  with  true 
discernment.  Many  there  are  who  start  upon  an  arduous 
life  without  foresight,  and  unless  these  are  directed  in  the 
right  way,  they  will  stray  and  fall. 

Do  not,  my  dearest  sister,  so  misunderstand  my  words 
regarding  the  pursuit  of  cleanness  and  purity  of  heart  as 
to  think  that  you,  in  your  own  purity,  can  be  found  pure 
in  the  sight  of  God,  since  all  our  righteousness  is  as  filthy 
rags  in  His  sight.  Do  not  therefore  waste  your  strength 
to  no  purpose.  Your  body  is  frail ;  you  are  of  the  tender 
sex;  do  not  undertake  what  all  of  David's  warriors,  the 
picked  and  stoutest  men  of  Israel,  could  not  perform. 
No  one  shall  be  saved  by  his  own  merits  or  his  own 
righteousness.  There  is  only  one  sacrifice  of  the  great 
High  Priest,  and  only  so  far  as  we  partake  of  this  are  we 
sanctified  and  pure  in  heart. 

You  will  say  to  me,  "How  shall  I  partake  of  this  sacri- 
fice; we  rarely  go  to  communion,  not  oftener  than  once  a 
fortnight,  or  occasionally  once  a  week?"  It  was  not  so 
much  this  outward  participation  that  I  urged;  but  rather 

243 


244  Wessel  Gansfort 

that  you  should  often  bathe  and  wash  and  be  baptized  in 
the  blood  of  the  Lamb,  who  was  born  for  you  and  given 
for  your  every  necessity.  At  that  time  I  promivSed  you 
only  one  thing,  and  I  now  repeat  that  I  do  not  merely 
assure  you  that  as  often  as  you  pray  the  Father  through 
the  sacrifice  of  his  Son  offered  for  your  sanctification  you 
are  sanctified.  I  would  affirm  even  more  than  that,  and 
assure  you  that  if  with  pious  intention  you  muse  upon  your 
lover  and  betrothed,  who  was  given  for  your  salvation,  you 
not  only  actually  embrace  him,  but  since  he  dwells  in  the 
banquet-room  of  your  heart,  you  have  eaten  of  his  flesh 
and  drunk  of  his  blood.  And  it  is  only  as  you  thus  eat 
and  drink  that  you  can  obtain  eternal  life.  But  if  you  do 
this  frequently  you  will  have  life,  the  more  abundant  life, 
abiding  in  you,  since  he  is  the  way,  the  truth,  and  the  life. 
Thus  he  himself  is  our  righteousness  and  purity  of  heart. 
If  you  think  and  reflect  upon  him  often,  you  will  be  pure 
in  heart. 

This  is  the  better  part  which  was  chosen  by  that  wise 
lover,  Magdalene,  who  sitting  at  the  feet  of  Jesus,  listened 
to  his  words,  intent  in  her  longing  and  wearied  by  no 
labor.  Only  be  sure,  however,  to  take  as  provision  for 
your  entire  journey  Christ's  parting  command,  "Take, 
eat  this  body  which  is  given  for  you,  and  drink  this  blood 
which  is  poured  out  for  you.  Do  this  in  remembrance  of 
me."  For  if  he  himself  was  born,  given,  and  made  unto 
us  redemption,  wisdom,  justification,  and  sanctification 
from  God,  the  Father,  we  can,  by  simply  meditating  upon 
him,  find  meat  and  bread  for  the  very  life  of  our  souls. 

What  then  is  the  use  of  all  this  needless  hardship  in 
trying  to  attain  the  impossible?  Through  desire  for 
Christ  and  pious  meditation  upon  him  it  is  within  our 
power  to  have  righteousness  and  purity  of  heart,  if  we 
but  wish  it.  These  things  are  obtained,  not  by  struggle 
and  conflict,  but  by  quiet  longing,  by  sweet  tears,  by  faith- 


Letter  to  a  Nameless  Nun  245 

/ 

'  ful  kisses  upon  the  feet  of  Jesus.  There  is  no  necessity  for 
severe  fasts  or  the  wearing  of  a  rough  goat's-hair  garment. 
The  worthy  fruit  of  repentance  requires  no  bodily  sever- 
ities, but  only  that  which  is  necessary  for  us  all,  the  piety 
that  availeth  for  all  things. 

Be  regular  in  the  observance  of  your  duties  in  your 
cloister  home,  and  that  will  suffice  for  bodily  discipline. 
In  the  matter  of  sleep  and  food  and  drink  and  clothing, 
follow  the  common  usage  and  be  content.  But  in  your 
reflection  and  meditation  on  the  Lord  Jesus  never  be 
content.  By  so  doing  you  will  often  have  him  as  the 
sweet  guest  of  your  heart,  and  by  his  counsel  he  will 
faithfully  control  all  your  thoughts.  In  your  confessions, 
I  advise  you  to  do  just  as  your  faithful  Mother  Superior 
and  leader  shall  counsel.  And  you  can  be  content  with  the 
thought  that  you  are  ready  to  confess  orally,  when  it  is 
expedient.  For  we  are  not  bound  to  confess  except  for  our 
^  good,  and  for  our  progress  in  salvation. 

Farewell,  my  sweet  sister  in  Christ. 


VI 


A  LETTER  OF  MASTER  WESSEL  OF  GRONINGEN  TO  BROTHER 
BERNARD  OF  MEPPEN,  REGULAR  CANON,  CONCERN- 
ING THE  PROGRESS  AND  THE  STATE  OF  SOULS  AFTER 
THIS  life;  WHAT — ^AND  HOW — WE  SHOULD  PRAY  FOR 
THEM,   ETC. 

If  salvation  is  real,  Jesus  truly  saves  his  people  from 
their  sins;  if  it  is  perfect,  he  completely  saves  them  from 
their  sins,  and  therefore  he  saves  them  from  all  sin.  It  is 
however  a  great  sin  for  a  person  not  to  return  the  love  of 
one  who  so  loves  him.  When  Jesus  comes  and  knocks, 
one  does  not  immediately  open  to  him,  unless  with  the 
knocking  there  suddenly  comes  from  heaven  a  sound  as  of 
the  rushing  of  a  mighty  wind.  Then  if  he  opens  his  heart, 
he  is  clothed  with  power  from  on  high,  enabling  him  to 
love  his  loving  Saviour,  and  to  receive  him  worthily  in  the 
spirit  of  justice  and  burning  that  washes  away  "the  filth 
of  the  daughters  of  Zion, " — the  filth,  I  say,  of  those  who 
do  not  love  him  who  so  loves  them.  Then  they  receive 
him  in  their  arms  and  bless  God  in  a  loud  voice;  and,  pray- 
ing that  he  will  let  them  depart  in  peace  according  to  the 
word  of  the  Lord,  they  give  thanks  because  they  have  seen 
the  salvation  which  saves  from  sin,  the  salvation  which  has 
been  prepared  before  the  face  of  all  peoples. 

Now  all  this  they  do  in  the  light  of  the  rising  day-star, 
when  they  are  not  yet  released  from  the  body.  But  when 
they  obtain  their  wish  at  the  hand  of  that  Saviour,  they 
are  loosed  from  the  prison  of  their  captivity,  from  the 

246 


Wessel  to  Bernard  of  Meppen         247 

flesh  of  sin,  from  the  body  of  corruption;  and  that  too  by 
the  death  so  precious  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord  by  which 
those  who  are  saved  are  set  free  and  established  in  the 
great  Hfe  of  wisdom,  glory,  and  love, — established  so  firmly 
that  thenceforth  no  creature  shall  be  able  to  separate  them 
from  the  love  of  God  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus. 

In  our  earthly  life  everything  is  done  as  by  lamplight 
through  the  Lamb's  names  and  messengers.  Yet,  when 
the  Son  of  Man  comes  with  the  sound  of  the  rushing  of  a 
mighty  wind,  and  we  are  clothed  with  power  from  on  high, 
the  name  of  the  Lamb  is  changed  for  his  appearance ;  and 
he,  who  before  was  beautiful  by  reason  of  his  exalted 
name,  becomes  in  the  light  of  the  rising  day-star  a  form, 
more  beautiful  than  any  of  the  sons  of  men.  Surely  there- 
fore, when — by  the  death  that  is  precious  in  the  sight  of 
the  Lord — the  saints  are  freed  from  all  their  infirmities 
here,  and  are  quickened  and  conformed  to  that  holy  life, 
as  happy  wayfarers  they  shall  pass  into  the  dawn  of  the 
approaching  day,  until  the  sun  shall  rise  clearly  before 
them.  Then  they  no  longer  walk  in  the  ways  of  the  Lord, 
neither  do  they  run,  nor  leap;  nay  I  think  I  should  speak 
too  moderately,  were  I  to  say,  they  fly;  rather  I  believe 
they  are  caught  up  like  lightning  flaming  with  love  in  that 
wide-spreading  morn  of  the  great  day  that  shall  dawn  be- 
fore the  rising  of  the  sun,  that  day  that  shall  spread  to  the 
farthest  confines  of  space. 

If  such  experiences  shall  follow,  when  I  am  done  with 
this  wretched  life,  I  shall  wish  that  which  God  wills  for  me. 
He,  however,  will  wish  me  to  advance  out  of  the  dawning 
day  into  the  light  of  the  rising  sun.  For  this  I  ought  to 
pray.  To  this  very  end  the  angels  pray  for  the  dead. 
And  we  too  pray  for  the  angels,  praying  that  their  blessed 
desires  for  us  may  be  fulfilled.  To  this  very  end  the  whole 
Church  prays,  or  ought  to  pray.  The  dead  pray  for  us, 
that  we  may  pass  into  the  happy  fellowship  of  the  saints. 


248  Wessel  Gansfort 

The  prayer  of  the  angels  for  the  dead  is  most  blessed. 
The  prayer  of  the  dead  for  us  is  more  blessed  than  our  own 
— whether  it  be  for  ourselves  or  for  them.  But  with 
regard  to  those,  who — by  the  testimony  of  one  who  so 
loves  them — are  altogether  spotless  and  perfect  and  yet  are 
still  wayfarers,  in  that  they  seek  and  find  not,  they  call 
and  he  does  not  answer, — if  anyone  prays  that  these  be 
loosed  from  their  sins,  even  though  this  prayer  proceed  out 
of  piety,  it  nevertheless  has  error  mingled  with  it.  As  to 
this,  I  have  said  that  I  doubted  whether  I  wanted  any 
such  prayer  of  the  pious  to  be  offered  for  me  when  dead. 
I  do  wish  that  they  would  pray  for  my  sanctification,  and 
for  my  progress  into  the  light  of  the  approaching  day  that 
shall  shine  brighter  and  brighter ;  that  the  holy  name  of  the 
sun  that  is  soon  to  rise  for  me  may  change  into  the  blessed 
appearance  of  the  sun  that  has  risen  (even  as  the  name  of 
the  Lamb  has  changed  into  his  happy  appearance),  so 
that  I  may  actually  see  all  the  treasures  of  God's  house  in 
Christ, — those  vast  treasures  of  wisdom,  glory,  and  love. 
For  such  blessings  I  wish  they  would  pray,  despising  all 
created  glory,  but  caught  up  in  their  desire  for  that  un- 
created »Sun  whom  they  have  not  yet  found,  because  when 
called  he  does  not  yet  answer  their  prayers. 

This  is  what  the  blessed  angels  pray  for  on  behalf  of 
those  who  are  already  happy.  This  is  what  those  who  are 
already  happy  pray  for,  that  they  themselves  may  be 
beatified.  This  is  what  we,  miserable  creatures,  ought  to 
pray  for  in  behalf  of  the  happy. 

Nevertheless  we  ought  not  to  mingle  error  with  our 
piety;  but  so  to  pray,  that  through  our  wisdom  and  up- 
rightness the  fervor  of  our  prayer  may  ascend  and  be 
kindled  like  incense  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord.  This  is 
baptism  in  the  Holy  Spirit,  by  which  they  were  baptized 
for  the  dead  in  the  early  Church.  For  if  any  were  bap- 
tized otherwise,  attention  was  called  to  it,  as  I  think,  by 


Wessel  to  Bernard  of  Meppen         249 

the  following  question,  "^,Vhy  then  were  they  baptized 
for  them  ? " ,  as  if  to  say,  their  baptism  suffered  loss,  and  was 
useless  in  so  much,  etc. 

Propositions. 

1.  Praying  for  the  dead  is  holy  meditation. 

2.  Holy  is  the  desire  of  those  who  pray  for  the  living. 

3.  In  so  far  as  they  are  holier  than  we,  their  desire  for 
us  is  holier  than  ours  for  them. 

4.  It  is  holy  meditation  for  us  to  pray  that  the  saints 
may  receive  the  "double  stole"  more  quickly. 

5.  Holy  is  our  desire  for  the  angels  that  they  may  re- 
ceive the  fruit  of  their  ministry,  the  object  of  their  prayers. 

6.  If,  however,  anyone  prays  for  the  dead,  who  are 
like  the  bride  described  in  Canticles,  altogether  fair  and 
undefiled, — though  his  prayer  proceed  out  of  piety — 
nevertheless  he  errs  if  he  asks  that  they  be  loosed  from 
their  sins,  just  as  he  errs  if  he  asks  that  an  angel  be  freed 
from  sorrow. 

7.  Our  piety,  when  we  pray  for  them,  is  pleasing  to 
them. 

8.  Their  most  acceptable  love  profits  us,  when  they 
make  intercession  for  us  with  groanings  which  cannot  be 
uttered.  This  they  could  not  do  while  in  this  life.  Their 
groanings  there,  how  unutterable  here! 

9.  So  far  as  our  praying  proceeds  out  of  piety,  it  is 
holy.  But  so  far  as  it  contains  error,  it  is  not  holy.  It  is 
therefore  holy,  and  not  holy :  like  propositions,  which  being 
built  partly  upon  two  others, — one  affirmative  and  the 
other  negative, — are  termed  "participants." 


VII 


A  LETTER  BY  THE  SAME  WESSEL  CONCERNING  ZEAL  AND 
PIETY  IN  THE  SEARCH  FOR  TRUTH;  CONCERNING  THE 
FRUITS  OF  HONORABLE  STRUGGLE  IN  THE  ARENA  OF 
TRUTH 

Wessel  sends  faithful   greeting  to  Brother  John  of 
Amsterdam. 

My  DEAREST  John: — 

Frequently  recalling  how  you  received  my  reply  to  your 
doubts  about  the  immediate  passage  (into  glory)  of  those 
who  like  Stephen  and  Lawrence  die  for  Christ,  I  have  had 
no  little  desire  again  to  ascertain  your  thought  in  regard 
to  it.  For  with  desire  I  desire  to  battle  among  men  of 
understanding  in  the  arena  of  truth,  wishing  not  only  to 
be  victorious,  but  also  to  advance  and  grow.  It  is  indeed 
by  such  battling  for  truth,  that  I — whether  conquering  or 
conquered — advance  toward  the  freedom  of  the  sons  of 
God.  For  the  promise  has  been  made  to  truth,  that  it 
shall  free  those  who  stand  upon  it.  This  is  the  struggle, 
in  which  the  Lord  Jesus  has  commanded  us  to  engage, 
that  we  may  enter  the  kingdom.  I  therefore  ask  that  we 
as  at  the  beginning  continue  to  struggle  in  search  of  the 
truth.  Nor  do  I  wish  you  merely  to  assent  to  my  replies, 
and  thus  to  find  rest  from  your  soul's  disturbance  without 
being  satisfied.  But  whatever  disturbs  you,  in  season 
and  out  of  season,  be  urgent  and  write  again;  and  not  only 
you,  but  let  all  who  are  with  you  be  equally  urgent.     For 

250 


Concerning  Zeal  and  Piety  251 

it  is  my  firm  belief  that  where  two  or  three  are  gathered 
together  to  seek  the  truth,  there  the  Way,  the  Truth,  and 
the  Life  will  be  in  the  midst  of  them.  And,  in  this  dark- 
some world,  how  can  we  better  gather  to  seek  the  truth 
than  in  a  pious  search  and  struggle  for  it  ?  The  chaplain 
of  Adwerd  has  promised  that,  if  I  would  meet  him,  he 
would  cure  me  simply  by  a  discussion.  I  beg  you,  who 
dwell  on  Mount  St.  Agnes,  if  you  wish  me  to  be  cured,  to 
battle  often  with  me  and  not  to  desist,  until — conquering 
or  conquered — you  extort  a  confession  of  the  truth  that 
shall  clear  away  all  doubts.  Hence,  in  order  to  sow  the 
seed  of  further  fruitful  discussion  between  us,  I  am  send- 
ing, by  my  Henry,  the  beginning  of  the  disputation  that  has 
arisen  with  the  chaplain  in  regard  to  the  necessity  of  way- 
farers being  made  perfect,  that  you  may  ruminate  upon  it. 
Bite,  chew,  taste,  and  test  it  again  and  again.  Now,  fare- 
well. 


VIII 

A  LETTER  OF  MASTER  WESSEL  CHALLENGING  A  CERTAIN 
MAN  TO  A  DISCUSSION  CONCERNING  THE  FULFILLMENT 
OF  SACRED  scripture:  CONCERNING  THE  IMPERFEC- 
TION OF  THE  HOLY  APOSTLES  AND  MARTYRS,  WHO 
EVEN  AFTER  THIS  LIFE  WERE  NOT  FORTHWITH 
CROWNED,  BUT  STILL  NEEDED  TO  ADVANCE  AND 
GROW  IN  PURGATORY,   I.  E.    IN  PARADISE 

Health  to  you  in  the  outer  and  inner  man,  but  es- , 
pecially  and  perfectly  in  the  latter. 

You  sent  word  by  my  Henry  that  if  I  were  close  at  hand, 
you  would  cure  me  by  a  discussion — which  you  were 
unable  at  such  a  distance  to  arrange.  And,  indeed,  I 
believe  you  would,  because  I  delight  in  discussions  between 
the  keenest  intellects.  For  through  them  I  always  either 
learn  or  teach,  knowing  that  I  am  a  debtor  both  to  the 
wise,  of  whom  I  may  learn,  and  to  those  who  are  desirous 
to  learn,  whom  I  may  teach.  Therefore  I  will  scatter  the 
seed  of  discussion  between  us. 

I  here  place  before  you  for  your  consideration  the  follow- 
ing opinion  of  mine  which  has  been  submitted  to  the  de- 
cision of  the  Lord  Abbot, — an  opinion  concerning  both 
purgatory  and  indulgences.  You  have  known  of  it  for  a 
long  time.     I  now  set  forth  the  arguments  pertaining  to  it. 

First,  the  Scripture  is  a  connected  whole,  every  part 
of  which  must  be  inspired  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  there- 
fore must  be  true.  For  the  whole  is  not  true  if  even  the 
smallest  part  is  false.     Now  in  this  connected  whole  there 

252 


Concerning  Progress  in  Purgatory       253 

is  one  part  which  states  that  all  the  law  must  be  so  fulfilled 
that  not  one  jot  or  one  tittle  shall  be  lacking.  Hence  all 
Scripture  that  is  divinely  inspired  must  be  fulfilled  per- 
fectly, so  that  not  one  jot  nor  one  tittle  shall  be  lacking. 
According  to  this  same  Scripture  the  Holy  Spirit — as 
stated  by  Paul — espoused  us  all  to  one  husband,  Christ, 
to  whom  he  might  present  us  as  a  pure  virgin,  not  having 
spot  or  wrinkle  or  any  such  thing.  Now  this  espousal  was 
made,  not  by  Paul,  but  by  the  Holy  Spirit  through  Paul. 
And  yet  even  Paul  did  not  find  that  the  espousal  was  per- 
fectly accomplished  in  himself  in  this  life,  so  that  not  one 
jot  or  one  tittle  was  lacking,  or  so  that  he  had  neither 
spot  nor  wrinkle.  For  he  confesses — with  regard  to 
himself — that  he  knows  not  how  to  pray  as  he  ought. 
Hence  a  large  jot,  a  large  tittle  was  lacking  in  his  know- 
ledge, since,  though  he  was  caught  up  to  the  third  heaven, 
he  did  not  attain  to  such  perfection  that  he  knew  what  he 
ought  to  pray  for.  And  so  long  as  he  lacked  this  perfect 
knowledge,  he  could  not  pray  as  he  ought.  Hence  also 
he  exclaimed  that  he  was  a  wretched  man,  saying,  "  Who 
shall  deliver  me  out  of  the  body  of  this  death?"  While 
he  claims  to  be  free,  claim.s  liberty,  he  still  groans  at  the 
slavery  of  corruption  and  death  and  is  unwilling  to  be 
subjected  to  vanity,  as  being  one  whom  the  truth  of  this 
knowledge  has  not  yet  set  free.  Hence  he  was  still  a 
slave,  a  bondsman  under  the  law  of  perfect  liberty. 

In  the  Canticles  the  bridegroom  addresses  his  bride, 
who  was  no  longer  betrothed  to  him  for  some  future 
espousal,  but  in  an  actual  and  present  espousal.  And 
this  bridegroom,  who  cannot  speak  falsely  and  cannot  be 
distrusted  by  the  bride,  repeatedly  honors  her  with  titles 
of  praise  that  truly  describe  her  at  that  very  time, 
declaring  that  she  is  fair,  and  saying:  "Behold  thou  art 
fair,  my  love ;  behold  thou  art  my  beautiful  dove,  my  fair 
one ;  rise,  make  haste,  come.     Rise,  make  haste,  my  love, 


254  Wessel  Gansfort 

my  betrothed,  and  come,  my  dove,  that  art  in  the  clefts 
of  the  rock,  in  the  cranny  of  the  wall.  Let  me  see  thy 
countenance,  let  me  hear  thj^-  sweet  voice;  for  sweet  is 
thy  voice,  and  thy  countenance  is  comely."  Now  what 
countenance  is  so  comely  that  not  one  jot  or  one  tittle  is 
lacking,  unless  it  be  that  of  the  inward  man  that  loves  God? 
And  what  voice  is  so  sweet,  unless  it  be  in  the  song  of  one 
who  loves  truly  and  purely?  Of  one,  I  say,  who  sings 
' *  the  Song  of  Songs ' '  ?  For  if  it  is  not  true,  if  it  is  not  pure 
and  sincere,  he  falsely  calls  it  "the  Song  of  Songs."  In 
like  manner  this  staunch  lover  in  his  praises  declares  that 
she  "comes  up  through  the  wilderness  like  a  pillar  of 
smoke,  perfumed  with  myrrh  and  frankincense,  with  all 
powders  of  the  merchant."  4th:  He  says  that  she  is  a 
mountain  of  myrrh  and  a  hill  of  frankincense,  again 
exclaiming,  "How  fair  thou  art,  my  love;  how  fair  thou 
art."  5th:  "Thou  art  all  fair,  my  love;  and  there  is  no 
spot  in  thee."  6th:  "He  says  that  "the  fragrance  of  her 
oils  surpasses  all  spices. "  7th :  That  "her  hps  drop  as  the 
honeycomb."  8th:  That  "the  smell  of  her  garments  is 
like  the  smell  of  frankincense  and  the  sweetest  incense." 
9th:  "Thou  art  fair,  my  love,  sweet  and  comely  as  Jeru- 
salem; terrible  as  an  army  with  banners."  loth:  "My 
dove,  my  undefiled,  is  but  one;  she  is  the  only  one  of  her 
mother;  she  is  the  choice  one  of  her  that  bare  her. "  nth: 
(Beautiful  are)  "her  steps  in  the  sandals  of  a  prince's 
daughter."  12th:  "How  fair  and  how  pleasant  art  thou, 
0  love,  for  delights ! "  And  there,  recounting  her  fragrance 
in  detail,  he  praises  her  from  head  to  foot. 

Now  contrast  these  encomiums  of  the  bridegroom  con- 
cerning his  bride  with  the  commands  of  the  Bridegroom, 
who  directs  us  to  pray  daily  that  our  debts  be  forgiven. 
It  is  obvious  that,  in  this  life,  even  Peter,  Paul,  John,  and 
James,  the  brother  of  the  Lord,  were  debtors:  Peter,  who 
walked  not  uprightly  according  to  the  truth  of  the  Gospel. 


Concerning  Progress  in  Purgatory       255 

Paul,  too, — together  with  all  who  attained  the  first 
fruits  of  the  Spirit, — though  not  of  his  own  will,  was  still 
subjected  to  vanity.  And  John,  the  disciple  whom  Jesus 
loved,  confesses  thus  for  himself  and  for  all  the  apostles, 
"  If  we  say  that  we  have  no  sin,  we  are  liars,  and  the  truth 
is  not  in  us."  And  James  says,  "In  many  things  we  all 
stumble. "  No  one  in  this  life,  therefore,  has  received  from 
the  Bridegroom  such  praises  as  are  vouchsafed  in  the  Song 
of  Songs.  And  yet  one  ought  to  receive  them,  whenever 
he  is  like  the  bride  that  is  described  there.  It  follows  that ; 
the  bride  attained  this  brightness,  fairness,  and  beauty 
somewhere  else.  Hence  this  one  Hfe  in  the  body  is  not  the 
whole  way  for  us.  For  evidently  the  bride  was  not  in  her 
own  country  when  she  complained,  "I  sought  him,  but  I 
found  him  not;  I  called  him,  but  he  gave  me  no  answer." 
But  she  is  to  become  happy  in  that  home,  where  no  one 
shall  complain  of  not  having  seen  and  not  having  found; 
where  none  shall  say,  "Oh  that  thou  wert  as  my  brother, 
that  I  might  find  thee  without  and  might  kiss  thee."  For 
the  marriage  there  is  a  blessed  one,  with  the  kiss,  mouth  to 
mouth, — one  spirit,  not  so  much  in  embraces,  as  one  spirit 
in  a  blessed  union.  ; 

The  bride,  therefore,  is  still  a  wayfarer  after  this  life." 
At  first  indeed  she  must  be  purified  from  hay,  stubble,  and 
wood  by  the  burning  and  consuming  fire  of  love.  After- 
ward she  burns  with  pure  love,  until  she  receives  a  perfect 
bride's  true  praise  from  the  lips  of  the  truest  and  wisest 
Bridegroom.  Then — by  the  decision  of  that  Bridegroom, 
whom  she  hitherto  has  not  found  and  who  has  given  her 
no  answer — her  perfect  love  for  the  first-born  Brother, 
her  perfect  love  for  God,  will  be  regarded  as  worthy  of  a 
place  and  mansion  in  the  Father's  house. 

Peter,  Paul,  John,  and  James  therefore  were  not  found 
worthy  of  such  praises  immediately  after  this  life.  Neither 
the  first  martyr,  Stephen,  nor  the  famous  laureate,  Law- 


256  Wessel  Gansfort 

rence,  nor  that  renowned  victor,  Vincent,  was  immedi- 
ately after  death  crowned  with  that  blessed  longed-for 
crown.  But  being  strengthened  by  the  rising  of  the  day- 
star,  so  that  it  was  impossible  for  them  to  go  back,  and 
stretching  forward  to  the  things  that  were  before,  they 
grew  more  worthy  of  the  bride's  praises,  they  were  called 
away  by  the  death  that  is  precious  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord. 
And  where  were  they  called,  unless  where  the  thief  was 
promised  he  would  be  the  companion  of  the  bride,  where 
Adam  and  Eve  were  to  be  purified,  enriched,  and  honored, 
until  they  became  perfect  brides  under  the  great  teacher 
of  love,  under  the  great  bridegroom  of  the  perfect  marriage 
who  was  to  receive  them?  For  paradise  is  midway  be- 
tween the  debtors  and  those  who  attain  perfection. 
Hence  it  is  on  the  way.  For  it  is  not  possible  to  go  from 
one  end  to  the  other,  except  by  going  through  the  middle, 
through  a  mediator. 

.1  beg  you  to  receive  these  pointed  arguments  of  mine, 
and  to  cure  me  by  discussing  them;  for  truly  discussion 
with  you  is  like  ointment  to  me.     Now,  farewell. 

Your  Wessel. 

Concerning  the  state  of  souls;  and  what  it  is  to 
love  Jesus. 

I .  Those  who  have  died  in  the  Lord  have  died  by  the 
death  that  is  precious  in  his  sight. 

(2.  Those  who  have  died  in  the  Lord  are  more  precious 
in  his  sight  than  were  Adam  and  Eve  in  their  original 
righteousness. 

3.  This  more  perfect  love  of  those  who  have  died  in  the 
Lord  is  worthier  of  paradise  than  was  original  righteousness. 

4,  The  love  of  those  who  have  died  in  the  Lord,  when 
strengthened,  will  no  longer  be  affected  by  prosperity  or 
adversity. 


Concerning  Progress  in  Purgatory       257 

5.  Those  who  have  died  in  the  Lord — being  parts  of  his 
image — are  purified,  since  in  the  time  of  the  apostles,  they 
baptized  for  the  dead. 

6.  The  love  of  all  who  have  died  in  the  Lord  is  not 
forthwith  made  perfect. 

7.  Imperfect  love  cannot  make  a  heart  perfectly  pure. 

8.  So  long  as  the  purity  of  their  heart  is  not  perfect, 
men  shall  not  see  God. 

9.  "The  path  of  the  just  is  a  shining  light  that  shineth 
more  and  more  unto  the  perfect  day. " 

ID.  When  the  light  shines,  when  the  light,  I  say,  of 
wisdom,  glory,  and  love  shines  more  and  more,  then  there 
is  purification  for  those  who  have  died  in  the  Lord. 

11.  This  shining  light  is  that  very  teacher  of  wisdom, 
the  Lord  Jesus. 

12.  To  be  conformed  to  this  light,  to  become  like  this 
exemplar  in  all  things, — this  is  to  be  purified. 

Unless  our  love  for  the  Lord  Jesus  on  account  of  our 
salvation,  justification,  and  blessedness  is  very  pure,  it  is 
but  filthy  rags  and  selfish  love, — such  love  as  a  famishing 
wolf  has  for  a  lamb.  For  we  ought  to  love  without  seek- 
ing anything  for  ourselves,  or  for  anyone  else  except  for 
God.  To  approach  and  to  be  conformed  to  this  law  is  to 
be  purified. 

Those  who  have  died  in  grace  are  in  a  better  condition 
of  grace  than  Adam  was  in  paradise.  For  they  are 
established  in  grace;  and  hence  are  endowed  with  such 
perfect  wisdom,  glory,  and  love,  that  no  creature  can  sepa- 
rate them  from  the  love  of  God,  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus. 
Therefore,  being  free  from  all  fear  of  such  separation  they 
are  perfectly  united  in  the  love  of  God  in  Christ,  in  whom 
are  all  the  treasures  of  wisdom  and  glory  and  love, — hidden 
from  us  here,  but  not  from  those  who  have  died  in  the 
Lord.  Greatly  blessed  are  they  that  see  those  treasures  of 
God  in  Christ  Jesus.     For  though  they  may  not  see  God 

VOL.  I — 17 


258  Wessel  Gansfort 

himself,  they  are  certain  that  they  shall  see  him  some 
day. 

"If  any  man  loveth  not  our  Lord  Jesus,  he  is  ana- 
thema. "  But  what  is  it  to  love,  unless  it  be  to  wish  above 
all  else  to  be  doing  his  commandments,  to  wish  above  all 
else  that  which  he  wishes,  and  because  he  wishes  it? 
Jacob  loved  Rachel,  and  because  of  the  great  love  he  had 
for  her,  his  seven  years  of  toilsome  servitude  seemed  unto 
him  but  a  few  days.  What  is  it  to  love,  unless  it  is  to  have 
a  heart  sealed  with  the  heart  of  Jesus,  so  as  to  be  able  to 
think  of  nothing  but  him,  according  to  the  word,  "Set  me 
as  a  seal  upon  thy  heart  ? "  Then  we  shall  wish  nothing  but 
what  he  wishes;  we  shall  wish  all  that  he  wishes,  and  our 
only  purpose  will  be  that  Jesus'  heart  may  be  our  seal, 
our  rule,  our  motive  power,  our  pivot;  the  fruit  of  our 
labors;  our  measure,  and  our  unalterable  seal. 

Love  does  not  wait  for  a  command.  For  a  person,  who 
waits  for  a  command  or  works  because  of  one,  does  not 
love.  Inactivity  would  have  been  harder  for  Magdalene 
than  compliance;  not  to  follow,  not  to  suffer  with  the 
Lord,  would  have  been  harder  than  to  take  up  her  cross, 
to  be  crucified  at  the  same  time  with  him.  In  the  eclogue 
concerning  Gallus  and  Lycoris  it  is  clear  that  the  love  of 
Gallus  was  misplaced.  And  thus  Vergil  furnishes  a  great 
example  of  what  is  due  from  true  love.  There  is  no  life 
except_jn  love;  no  holy  life  except  in  holy  love.  Hence 
we  ought  to  love  the  first-born  Brother  and  through  him 
be  brought  back  to  the  love  of  the  Father.  For  if  we  do 
not  love  him  with  a  pure  heart,  we  shall  not  see  his  face. 
I  If  any  man  loveth  not,  he  is  anathema;  therefore  in 
[order  not  to  be  anathema,  he  must  love.  John  clearly 
shows  that  the  way  to  the  love  of  God  is  through  the  love 
of  the  brethren,  when  he  says,  "He  that  loveth  not  his 
brother  whom  he  seeth,  how  can  he  love  God  whom  he 
seeth    not?"     This    reasoning    is    not    very    convincing 


Wessel's  Challenge  to  a  Discussion      259 

without  an  explanation  concerning  the  brother  whom  one 
sees.  Let  it  be  admitted  that  that  brother  is  the  first-born 
among  many  brothers,  the  first-born  of  all  the  sons  of  God, 
the  king  and  priest,  the  sacrifice,  the  victim,  the  first 
fruits,  the  tithes,  the  peace  offering,  the  whole  burnt  offer- 
ing, the  incense,  the  bridegroom  and  lover;  he  who  comes, 
knocks,  and  appears;  who  was  not  received,  nor  esteemed, 
nor  loved,  although  he  was  given  to  man  by  God  to  be  all 
this  and  for  such  great  purposes.  He  that  loveth  not  such 
a  brother,  how  can  he  love  God  whom  he  seeth  not? 
For  thus  stated,  the  reasoning  is  clear  and  convincing. 
And  the  clearer  the  truth  is,  the  more  precious  and  the 
more  to  be  cherished  is  love. 

We  ought  to  have  love  of  the  brethren ;  love,  I  say,  such 
as  we  should  have  for  such  a  first-born  Brother;  and — 
because  of  the  first-born  Brother — a  love  so  great,  that 
we  would  lay  down  our  lives  for  the  brethren.  Nay  more, 
we  should  have  such  love  of  salvation  and  our  Saviour 
that  the  love  of  Jesus  shall  extinguish  all  love  of  self; 
otherwise  he  does  not  save  his  people  from  their  sins. 
I'  Few  men  know  true  love,  even  for  mankind ;  for  love  is 
jbot  understood  except  through  inward  experience,  etc. 

No  man  knows  a  love  that  is  worthy  of  the  first-bom 
Brother.  If  he  knew  the  worth  of  that  love,  he  would 
always  pray  as  he  ought,  until  he  loved  worthily. 

The  Apostle  knew  not  how  to  pray  as  he  ought.  Did 
the  Apostle  enter  without  being  purified  from  his  ignor- 
ance? Did  he  enter  without  worthy  love?  Ought  he  to 
have  been  purified  of  that  un worthiness  of  love?  Then, 
purified  by  whom,  unless  by  him  who  loved  him,  the 
master  of  love,  the  first  example  of  brotherly  love  ?  And 
when  is  he  purified?  Surely,  when  the  master  of  love 
shall  will  it.  And  where  is  he  to  be  purified  except  in  the 
place  best  fitted  for  the  purification  of  love?  And  what 
place  is  best  adapted  for  that?    Not  heaven,  into  which 


26o  Wessel  Gansfort 

nothing  unworthy,  weak,  or  vain  shall  enter.  Not  the 
prison  of  the  captives;  for  love  is  nursed  and  increased 
through  freedom.  Then  the  most  fitting  place  for  this 
purification  is  paradise,  which  was  at  first  reserved  for 
original  righteousness;  which  was  promised  to  the  thief, 
who  died  soon  after  by  the  death  precious  in  the  Lord, 
who  was  established  forever — never  to  turn  backward 
toward  evil,  who  was  already  purer  than  Adam  and  Eve; 
for  they  were  not  established  in  the  love  of  the  brethren 
and  in  the  love  of  God.  For  the  path  to  love  is  through 
the  purified  love  of  the  brethren;  according  to  the  word, 
"He  that  loveth  not  his  brother  whom  he  seeth,  how  can 
he  love  God  whom  he  seeth  not  ? " 

Therefore,  we  must  be  trained  to  perfect  love  under  the 
great  master ;  at  first  by  love  of  that  which  is  seen ;  after- 
wards, to  love  of  God  w^hom  we  have  not  seen.  Hence, 
they  that  see  Jesus  in  paradise  and  all  the  treasures  of 
wisdom,  glory,  and  love  hidden  from  us  in  him,  are  still 
only  on  the  way,  though  they  truly  live  a  great  and  happy 
life.  For  while  they  see  the  first-born  Brother  of  every 
creature,  the  most  blessed  created  being,  still  they  only 
see  a  creature,  so  long  as  their  love  is  not  made  perfect 
toward  God.  For  John  clearly  separates  the  brother,  that 
has  been  seen,  from  God,  who  has  not  been  seen. 

Sacred  Scripture  cannot  be  taken  in  parts.  For  the 
entire  Sacred  Scripture  is  a  single  essential  connected 
whole,  because  the  smallest  categorical  part  belonging  to 
it  cannot  be  false.  Nay,  all  the  law  must  be  fulfilled, 
so  that  not  one  jot  or  one  tittle  is  lacking,  etc. 


IX 


EXTRACTS  FROM  THE  LETTER  OF  MASTER  JOHN  OF  AMSTER- 
DAM TO  BERNARD  OF  MEPPEN,  PROCURATOR  ZILAE, 
CONCERNING  SUFFRAGES  FOR  THE  LIVING  AND  THE 
DEAD,  AND  CONCERNING  THE  CELEBRATION  OF  MASSES, 
ACCORDING  TO  MASTER  WESSEL 

Your  letter,  my  most  affectionate  Bernard,  has  caused 
me  no  little  joy;  I  reply  briefly  in  regard  to  the  matters 
about  which  you  now  write. 

You  ask  what  I  think  about  suffrages  for  the  dead.  I 
wish  you  to  know  that  I  unhesitatingly  maintain  and 
believe  that  prayer  for  the  dead  is  beneficial,  not  only  to 
him  who  prays,  but  to  him  for  whom  prayer  is  made,  on 
condition  however  that  the  latter  departed  in  grace. 
Hence  the  apostles  also  used  to  baptize  for"  the  dead. 
With  what  baptism,  but  that  of  prayer  and  groanings  that 
cannot  be  uttered?  It  is  very  strange  if  our  Master 
Wessel  told  you  anything  contrary  to  this,  for  this  was  the 
way  in  which  he  explained  these  matters  to  me.  Just 
before  his  death  I  wrote  to  him  at  great  length  concerning 
them.  That  you  may  know  more  fully  what  he  taught  us 
on  the  subject,  read  the  following  propositions  again  and 
again;  for  I  myself  did  not  understand  them  at  the  first 
reading. 

1.  A  suffrage  is  an  aid  to  need,  want,  and  weakness, 
divinely  obtained  by  intercession. 

2.  The  most  powerful  of  all  suffrages  is  the  suffering 

of  the  Lord  Jesus. 

261 


262.  Wessel  Gansfort 

3.  A  suffrage  issues  primarily  from  him  who  obtains 
it,  although  principally  from  him  who  grants  it;  and  it 
is  effective  both  in  him  who  undertakes  and  him  who 
receives  it. 

4.  Suffrages  are  dependent  upon  the  discretion  of  him 
who  grants  them. 

5.  It  is  within  the  intercessor's  discretion  to  intercede 
for  anyone  he  pleases. 

6.  It  is  not  within  the  intercessor's  discretion  to  secure 
as  much  as  he  wishes. 

7.  That  an  intercession  should  result  in  a  suffrage, 
small  or  great,  is  not  within  the  discretion  of  the  person 
who  intercedes. 

8.  It  does  not  follow  automatically  {in  opere  operato) 
that  by  mere  intercession  one's  efforts  will  secure  a  suffrage 
for  another. 

9.  The  work  wrought  by  the  effort  of  the  agent  may 
become  a  suffrage,  but  only  by  extrinsic  denomination. 

10.  No  suffrage  becomes  a  suffrage  by  intrinsic  de- 
nomination apart  from  the  change,  growth,  and  progress 
of  the  inner  man. 

11.  No  suffrage  is  useful  aside  from  the  work  of  the 
agent  himself,  who  obtains  the  suffrage  through  the  love 
of  the  person  that  makes  progress. 

12.  The  works  effected,  aside  from  the  works  of  those 
operating,  do  not  serve  as  suffrages  to  anyone. 

These  propositions,  my  Bernard,  assuming  that  they 
square  with  what  he  wrote  to  you,  seem  to  me  to  contain 
sound  sense.  For  when  Master  Wessel  says  that  he  does 
not  wish  prayer  to  be  offered  for  him,  except  in  order  that 
he  may  be  illumined  by  the  bright  light  of  the  dawning 
day,  i.  e.  the  highest  truth,  he  thereby  merely  desires 
your  suffrages  to  be  directed  to  the  end,  that  the 
spirit  of  truth  shall  exalt  his  inner  man  by  such  an  in- 
crease of  spiritual  light,  that — at  last — rendered  pure  in 


Master  John  to  Bernard  263 

heart    he   can  lift   clear  eyes  to  the  source  of  eternal 
splendor. 

And  as  I  judge  it  worth  while  to  give  thought  to  these 
considerations,  I  will  proceed  to  state  them  more  broadly: 

13.  Without  the  work  of  the  agent,  a  mass  does  not 
become  a  suffrage  for  anyone, 

14.  A  mass  without  all  the  appointed  work  of  the  cele- 
brant may  become  a  suffrage  to  the  auditor  through  his 
own  work. 

15.  A  mass  may  be  a  suffrage  for  the  one  man  and  a 
judgment  for  the  other. 

16.  A  mass  serves  as  a  judgment  to  anyone  who  is  not 
rightly  disposed  toward  it,  whether  he  hears  or  does  not 
hear  it. 

17.  A  mass  is  a  suffrage  for  anyone,  so  far  as  he  is 
worthily  affected  by  it. 

18.  A  mass  becomes  a  suffrage  through  the  suffering 
of  the  Lord,  but  only  to  those  who  suffer  with  him  and  in 
proportion  to  the  measure  of  their  suffering. 

19.  A  mass  is  of  no  avail  to  one  who  does  not  suffer  at 
all. 

20.  For  those  who  suffer  perfectly  in  purgatory,  the 
celebration  of  masses  is  unnecessary.  This  is  clear  because 
to  suffer  perfectly  is  to  love  perfectly,  and  he  that  loves 
perfectly  is  worthy  of  the  throne  rather  than  of  purgatory. 

21.  Whether  masses  are  celebrated  or  not,  souls  in 
purgatory  will  reign  with  Christ  to  the  extent  that  they 
make  progress  in  suffering  with  him. 

22.  A  mass  is  nothing  but  the  suffering  of  Christ  and 
the  co-suffering  of  him  who  recalls  it. 

23.  The  co-suffering  of  another,  e.  g.  of  the  celebrant, 
does  not  avail  for  suffrage  to  those  who  are  in  purgatory, 
no  matter  how  great  the  sacnfice  or  the  co-suffering  or  the 
pious  discretionary  intercession  may  be. 

24.  The  discretionary  measure  of  obtaining  the  suffrage 


264  Wessel  Gansfort 

is  solely  proportioned  to  the  measure  of  the  granting  of  it ; 
and  the  measure  of  obtaining  it  is  proportioned  to  the 
measure  of  participation ;  and  the  measure  of  participation 
is  proportioned  to  the  measure  of  acceptance  of  the  co- 
suffering. 

25.  This  gradation  in  the  measure  of  pious  suffrages  is 
solely  in  the  hand  of  God  and  of  the  mediator,  the  Lord 
Jesus. 

From  all  these  propositions  we  conclude  that  prayer  for 
the  living  as  well  as  for  the  dead  should  have  as  its  end, 
"Thy  will  be  done,  as  in  heaven,  so  on  earth."  It  was 
stated  above  that  the  mass  is  unnecessary  for  those  who 
share  perfectly  in  Christ's  sufferings.  This,  if  I  under- 
stand it  aright,  does  not  refer  to  every  necessity,  but  is 
restricted  to  the  need  and  want  that  may  be  removed  by 
suffrages.  For  if  masses  were  not  celebrated,  i.  e.  if  the 
Lamb's  flesh  were  not  eaten  in  heaven,  the  souls  in  heaven 
would  not  live  with  that  life,  with  which  they  live  unto 
God.  "I,"  said  he,  "appoint  unto  you  a  table,  that  ye 
may  eat  at  my  table. " 

It  seems  to  me  that  the  tenth  proposition  in  the  light  of 
what  is  deduced  from  it  accords  well  with  the  custom  of  the 
Church.  For  we  say  daily,  "Grant  them  eternal  rest,  O 
Lord,  and  may  the  everlasting  light  shine  for  them." 
What  is  the  everlasting  light  but  the  spirit  of  truth  or  the 
seven  eyes  of  the  Lamb,  which  are  the  seven  spirits  sent 
forth  into  every  man?  And  this  light,  as  it  grows  in 
them,  glorifies  Jesus  in  them,  and  I  add,  the  Father  also. 
Now  if  the  light  glorifies  the  Father,  it  is  plain  that  it  also 
makes  men  rich  in  fruit,  in  accordance  with  the  word, 
"herein  is  my  Father  glorified,  that  ye  bear  much  fruit." 
Hence,  when  the  everlasting  light  is  joined  to  the  prayers 
of  the  suffragant  for  him  who  receives  the  suffrage,  surely 
the  tenth  proposition  is  fulfilled.  And  since  I  think  that 
eternal  rest  and  the  everlasting  light  are  interdependent, 


Master  John  to  Bernard  265 

so  that  it  is  impossible  for  the  everlasting  light  to  be  be- 
stowed upon  them  (I  speak  of  ordained  power)  without 
eternal  rest,  I  am  persuaded  that  I  am  right  in  claiming 
that  our  Master  Wessel  said  he  did  not  wish  prayer  to  be 
offered  for  him,  except  in  order  that  he  might  be  illumined 
by  the  sun  of  righteousness.  For  without  the  illumination 
of  the  true  light,  rest  of  whatever  sort  was  not  worth  while 
for  him,  etc. 


X 


A  LETTER  BY  DOCTOR  WESSEL  OF  GRONINGEN  TO  DOCTOR 
JACOB  HOECK,  THE  THEOLOGIAN,  CONCERNING  ZEAL 
AND  PIETY  IN  THE  SEARCH  FOR  TRUTH  WITHOUT 
ANY  STUBBORNNESS  OF  WILL 

Rejoicing  not  a  little  at  the  result  of  our  first  confer- 
ence and  delighted  with  your  reputation  among  good  men, 
I  congratulate  myself  on  having  found  a  man  who  sin- 
cerely reverences  the  truth;  and  particularly  one  who  so 
courteously  promises  to  be  willing  to  reply  whenever  I 
write.  I  was  glad  to  receive  this  promise,  as  I  now  found 
a  chance  to  exercise  in  the  old-time  arena  of  debate.  Not 
that  mere  verbal  contentions  delight  me,  as  they  once  did ; 
but  because — now  that  my  purpose  has  changed  for  the 
better — I  may  hope  to  benefit  either  myself  or  my  neighbor. 

I  learned  from  your  own  lips  that  you  had  been  dis- 
pleased at  some  teachings  of  mine,  and  that  you,  in  alarm 
had  written  about  the  matter  to  Cologne.  For  this  I  do 
not  find  fault  with  you.  And  yet  I  think  it  would  have 
been  more  obliging  and — by  the  standard  of  gospel  recti- 
tude— more  neighborly,  if,  when  I,  your  brother,  sinned 
against  you,  you  had  shown  me  my  fault,  between  you  and 
me  alone;  and,  if  I  would  not  hear  you,  had  taken  with  you 
two  or  three  witnesses  excelling  in  faith  and  authority; 
and  then  at  last,  if  I  would  not  hear  you,  had  denounced 
me.  However,  since  you  did  not  denounce  the  person  by 
name,  there  is  still  ample  room  to  apply  this  gospel  rule. 
I  beg  you,  my  distinguished  Master,  to  treat  me  with  that 

266 


Wessel  to  Jacob  Hoeck  267 

perfect  sincerity  for  which  you  are  far-famed.  I  beseech 
you,  by  the  promise  which  you  of  your  own  accord  gave 
me  when  I  requested  you  ahvays  to  reply  to  my  letters, 
write  to  me  if  any  word  of  mine  ever  displeases  you.  I 
admit  that  in  my  assertions  I  am  frequently  found  to  be 
singular;  indeed  being  very  suspicious  myself  of  my  un- 
usual views,  I  dread  not  a  little  that  I  may  sometimes  be 
mistaken.  But,  inasmuch  as  the  reasons  that  lead  me  to 
these  conclusions  have,  as  it  seems  to  me,  their  origin  in 
faith  and  in  the  Sacred  Page,  I  long  to  give  birth  to  them, 
and  sometimes  I  even  burst  forth  with  them,  hoping  to  be 
convinced  and  corrected  by  you  or  men  like  you,  who  are 
wiser  than  myself.  You  are  not  unaware  of  the  benefit 
arising  from  convincing  and  correcting  others,  viz.  that 
by  effective  and  open  argument  they  are  brought  back  to 
the  truth.  You  will,  therefore,  gain  your  brother,  if  you 
show  me  my  sin  when  I  offend  you.  I  have  never  been 
stubborn,  even  in  idle  discussions.  But  now  I  think  I 
should  blush  more  than  ever  to  deny  the  plain  truth. 

I  have  been  in  many  universities,  seeking  discussion, 
and  I  have  found  many  opponents.  Sometimes,  too, 
they  have  been  offended  at  my  belief.  But  never  have 
they  parted  with  me  in  offense.  For  when  my  reasons  had 
been  heard  and  carefully  considered,  I  left  them  quieted, 
either  agreeing  with  me,  or  at  least  admitting  that  my 
statements  were  not  unreasonable;  so  that  in  the  end  no 
one  made  complaint  concerning  me. 


XI 


A    LETTER     BY     THE      VENERABLE      MASTER    WESSEL     OF 

GRONINGEN,  PROFESSOR  OF  SACRED  THEOLOGY,  TO 

MASTER  ENGELBERT  OF  LEYDEN 

You  readily  understand  how  greatly  I — having  had  some 
slight  experience  as  I  think  of  your  love — desire  your  wel- 
fare. I  admit  that  once,  when  we  were  younger,  you  sent 
me  some  letters,  which  were  by  no  means  juvenile,  but 
rather  full  of  seriousness  and  worthy  of  a  man,  so  that  I 
have  no  reason  to  complain  of  the  multitude  (of  my  oppo- 
nents). Now  again  your  love  glows  and  burns,  so  that 
you  cannot  refrain  from  writing  at  least  a  little,  in  order 
that  I  may  see  that  you  have  retained  a  kindly  remem- 
brance of  me. 

I  well  believe  that  you  could  not  refrain  from  writing. 
Indeed,  that  pious  zeal  of  yours  for  the  Church  of  God  has 
become  so  ardent  that  you  even  lavishly  load  me  with  dis- 
tinctions,— observing  that  I  am  exceedingly  wise,  that  I 
have  too  lofty  aims,  that  I  investigate  matters  too  boldly, 
that  I  am  of  the  number  of  those  who  are  tripped  up  by 
ambition;  that — in  my  own  sight — I  am  exceedingly 
wise  and  appear  to  be  very  learned,  and  that  thereby  I  am 
pleasing  to  foolish  men ;  that  I  contemplate  things  wholly 
beyond  my  understanding;  that  I  love  myself  more  than 
I  ought,  and  that  therefore  my  judgment  upon  and  con- 
cerning myself  is  perverted. 

By  these  and  similar  statements  you  do  indeed  clearly 
show  how  kindly  a  remembrance  of  me  you  retain,  and 

26S 


Wessel  to  Engelbert  269 

you  have  not  ceased  to  make  this  clear  in  the  years  gone 
by.  But  truly  I  thank  you  and  the  multitude  (of  my 
opponents)  for  thinking  as  I  do,  and  confirming  my  opin- 
ion of  myself.  For  surely,  as  you  add,  there  are  innumer- 
able other  matters,  "about  which  " — to  use  your  own  words 
— "I  have  no  notion  whatever. "  Therefore  you  warn  me 
to  be  very  prudent  and  to  beware  of  wishing  to  be  regarded 
as  wiser  than  all  wise  men.  For  perhaps,  if  I  have  this 
desire,  I  shall  not  unjustly  be  regarded  as  foolish  in  the 
judgment  of  the  wise. 

With  regard  to  these  admonitions  of  yours,  I  thank  you 
not  a  little,  as  I  ought,  for  grieving  so  deeply  over  my 
faults.  But  I  am  also  very  glad  to  read  what  you  add 
about  that  letter  of  mine,  which  I  sent  more  than  four 
years  ago  to  our  most  venerable  Master,  Jacob  Hoeck, 
the  Lord  Dean  of  Naeldwick.  For,  as  he  has  not  deigned 
to  make  any  reply  since  then,  I  have  been  afraid  he  did 
not  receive  it.  Now,  however,  I  am  not  in  the  least  in 
doubt  about  that.  But  I  am  waiting  in  suspense  to  learn 
how  he  regarded  the  letter.  Still,  in  any  case,  I  rejoice 
that  he  received  it.  And  since  he  has  given  it  to  you  to 
read,  I  beg  him  not  to  judge  me  unworthy  of  a  reply,  but 
to  express  his  opinion  in  regard  to  it  frankly.  For  I 
depend  not  a  little  upon  him  because  of  his  reputation 
among  the  great.  Moreover,  if  he  deigns  to  write,  let 
him,  by  the  promise  I  now  make  to  you  that  I  will  reply, 
hold  me  firmly  bound  always  to  answer  him  when  he 
writes.  And  let  him  not  think  that  I  am  making  this 
promise  idly,  as  he  once  did  to  me  in  the  following  words, 
"Now,  if  you  do  not  scorn  this  letter,  but  deem  it  worthy 
of  a  reply,  I  shall  not  cease  hereafter  to  inflict  my  writings 
more  frequently  upon  you."  Four  years  have  already 
passed  since  I  deemed  it  worthy  of  a  reply.  More  than 
that,  I  have  written  in  reply  every  year.  But  though, 
year  after  year,  I  have  looked  again  and  again  for  a  re- 


270  Wessel  Gansfort 

sponse  from  him,  I  have  not  been  comforted  by  any, 
excepting  at  last,  by  this  meager  statement  of  yours, 
from  which  at  any  rate  I  can  infer  that  he  received  my 
letter. 

And  indeed  I  thank  you  even  for  your  taunts,  because, 
although  I  do  not  think  he  agrees  with  you  by  any  means, 
still — with  regard  to  indulgences — I  scarcely  believe  that 
he  thinks  as  I  do  in  every  respect.  For  a  wise  and  eminent 
man  has  many  reasons  to  make  him  unwilling  to  publish 
his  opinion  among  men  of  but  ordinary  ability.  Therefore 
I  dissent  all  the  more  from  the  opinion  you  expressed  in 
regard  to  him  last  year,  when  you  said  he  detested  the 
teaching  of  the  Nominalists.  For  it  is  hardly  possible 
for  such  a  man  to  have  become  prominent  in  the  path 
followed  by  the  Realists. 

Now  let  me  make  ready  to  meet  your  invectives.  You 
are  annoyed  at  my  statement  that  St.  Peter  and  all  the 
pontiffs  following  him  did  not  have  the  power  to  grant  or 
bestow  a  single  hour  of  indulgences.  You  are  so  indignant 
at  this  that  you  impatiently  exclaim,  "Who  is  so  blind, 
so  unacquainted  with  Sacred  Theology,  so  ignorant  of 
pontifical  rights,  as  to  think  that  the  pope  or  the  bishops 
cannot  by  Christ's  authority  bestow  an  indulgence  upon 
anyone?" 

Here  I  am  surprised  that  you,  who  from  boyhood  have 
been  devoted  to  books  and  oratory,  do  not  weigh  your 
words  more  carefully.  How  can  one  grant  by  Christ's 
authority,  unless  he  grants  in  accord  with  the  will  of 
Christ?  If  then  one  grants  indulgences  by  the  authority 
of  Christ  and  in  accordance  with  his  will  and  his  valuation 
of  them,  how,  I  ask,  will  you  establish  the  claim  that  the 
will  of  Christ  has  determined  that  one  and  the  same  work 
of  indulgence  is  worth — now  six  years,  now  seven,  now 
seven  hundred,  now  seven  thousand,  and  now  plenary 
remission?     How   can   one   determine   that   the   pope's 


Wessel  to  Engelbert  271 

estimate  of  a  good  work  is  exactly  the  same  as  that  of 
Christ? 

It  is  true  that  Peter  and  the  apostles  had  the  power  of 
binding  and  loosing  upon  earth;  but  this  they  had  in  the 
exercise  of  their  ministry,  not  of  their  authority.  They 
had  the  power  to  provide  the  words  of  the  gospel ;  and  to 
believers  they  could  administer  the  mysteries  of  grace,  the 
sacraments  of  charisms,  the  precepts  of  salvation.  And 
all  who  received  these  dutifully  were  truly  loosed  from  the 
bonds  of  captivity  to  the  devil.  But  I  do  not  believe  that 
Peter  possessed  the  right  either  to  loose  whomsoever  he 
pleased  from  the  bond  of  Satan  or  to  bind  him  therewith. 
For  just  as  there  is  but  one  that  baptizes  in  the  Holy 
Spirit,  so  there  is  but  one  that  binds  and  looses, — binds, 
I  say,  and  looses  with  authority.  But  with  what  authority 
can  the  pope  loose,  when  he  does  not  know  whether  the 
person  he  has  loosed  is  loosed  from  the  bond  of  Satan  or 
not?  How  can  he  judge  what  he  does  not  know?  For 
I  reason  thus :  He  cannot  know  those  bonds ;  therefore  he 
cannot  discern  them.  If  he  cannot  discern  them,  he  can- 
not decide.     But  if  he  cannot  decide,  how  can  he  absolve  ? 

Even  more  shameful  than  this,  however,  is  that  subter- 
fuge of  some  sainted  Doctors,  who  admitting  that  only 
God  forgives  sins,  deny  that  this  is  true  of  penalties,  be- 
cause there  is  thus  afforded  them  a  riper  opportunity  of 
deception.  Yet  it  is  a  rule  in  theology  that  "the  faithful 
ought  not  to  assert  anything  that  is  not  contained  in  the 
rule  of  faith."  These  inconsistent  quibblers,  however, 
violate  this  rule.  The  Lord  Jesus  said  explicitly  in  regard 
to  sins,  "Whose  soever  sins  ye  forgive,  they  are  forgiven 
unto  them."  And  in  view  of  Augustine's  dictum  con- 
cerning this,  they  do  not  dare  to  interpret  it  except  as  it 
ought  to  be  understood.  As  regards  penalties,  however, 
the  Lord  Jesus  said  nothing.  Nor  will  the  Sacred  Scrip- 
tures furnish  any  passage  whatever  by  which  the  judgment 


272  Wessel  Gansfort 

of  penalties  due  for  past  and  altogether  forgiven  sins  can 
be  referred  to  the  decision  of  the  pope. 

I  admit  that  whose  soever  sins  the  apostles  remitted, 
they  were  truly  remitted  unto  them.  But  there  are  many 
forms  of  figurative  speech.  This  is  figurative  speech. 
I,  however,  fight  and  contend,  not  in  figurative,  but  in 
literal  speech.  Unquestionably,  in  the  case  of  those  who 
heard,  received,  and  believed  the  truth  of  the  gospel  ut- 
tered by  the  apostles,  who  having  confessed  with  heart 
and  lips  received  the  sacraments  and  obeyed  the  apos- 
tolic admonitions, — unto  these  the  apostles — in  the  exer- 
cise of  their  ministry,  not  of  their  power — in  some  way 
forgave  their  sins.  For  they  were  cooperators  with  God 
in  the  world.  And  these  sins  were  truly  forgiven.  For  if 
they  had  not  been  truly  forgiven  by  God,  the  statement 
would  not  be  made  that  the  apostles  in  some  way  did 
forgive  them. 

You  add — and  that  too  with  considerable  weight — that 
the  Holy  Church  is  governed  by  the  Spirit  of  God.  This 
is  never  altogether  true  even  in  those  things  which  render 
it  sacred  and  in  which  it  works  out  its  own  salvation.  But 
in  matters  in  which  it  is  ignorant,  the  Church  certainly 
makes  mistakes.  Alas!  we  greatly  lament  its  serious 
mistakes,  especially  in  the  salt  that  has  lost  its  savor,  in 
the  steward  that  was  accused  of  wasting  his  lord's  goods, 
in  the  unwise  and  faithless  servant,  whom  his  lord  set  over 
his  household  to  give  them  their  portion  of  food,  but  who 
beat  the  manservants  and  maidservants.  In  tares  of  this 
sort,  in  the  case  of  such  persons  who  have  been  raised  to 
positions  of  authority  through  the  sins  of  the  people,  it  is 
quite  natural  that  some  errors  are  sown  in  the  Church. 
For  they  are  men  of  that  type  whom  Bernard  of  Clair- 
vaux,  in  his  sermon  before  the  General  Synod  at  Rheims 
and  in  the  presence  of  the  pope,  called,  not  shepherds,  not 
hirelings,    not   wolves, — but   devils!     Such   errors   alas! 


Wessel  to  Engelbert  273 

were  also  scattered  abroad  through  the  most  corrupt 
Indulgentiaries,  who  have  in  our  day  been  condemned  as 
forgers. 

Nor  must  we  attribute  this  error  to  the  falsity  of  these 
men  alone.  Earlier  Pope  Sixtus  knew  of  this  error,  and 
yet,  in  order  to  exculpate  himself  before  the  envoy  of  King 
Louis  of  France,  he  actually  placed  his  hands  over  his  heart 
and  swore,  on  the  word  of  a  pontiff,  that  he  did  not  know 
of  it.  But  of  what  value  was  that  exculpation,  when 
afterwards  knowing  of  it,  he  nevertheless  dissembled  and 
tolerated  it?  And  it  not  only  continued  in  France,  but  it 
spread  until  it  even  entered  Holland.  These  and  all 
things  of  this  sort  I  believe  to  be  errors,  while  you  declare 
they  must  be  sustained,  beUeved,  and  fostered,  for  fear 
that,  if  you  say  that  the  Holy  Church— which  is  directed  by 
the  Holy  Spirit — errs  in  any  respect,  you  may  blaspheme. 
Such  is  your  wisdom  that  you  justify  and  sanction  all  the 
error  of  corrupt  prelates,  regarding  it  as  impossible  for 
avaricious  pontiffs  to  commit  any  disgraceful  act  for  the 
sake  of  base  gain, — even  in  particularly  perilous  times. 

The  pope  has  power  to  grant  plenary  remission  to  those 
who  are  entirely  contrite  and  who  have  made  confession, 
just  as  he  has  the  power  to  baptize  a  faithful  catechumen 
in  the  Holy  Spirit, — but  only  in  exercising  his  ministry, 
not  his  authority, — nor  on  the  ground  that  it  is  so,  because 
he  any  more  than  any  other  lawful  minister  wills  it.  But 
he  has  that  power  because  of  his  office,  not  because  of  his 
authority. 

Moreover,  if  the  truly  contrite  who  have  confessed  have 
not  done  so  perfectly,  God  grants  them,  not  plenary  re- 
mission, but  only  true  remission.  For,  though  they  may 
indeed  live  in  the  Spirit,  nevertheless — being  babes  in 
Christ — they  still  have  need  of  much  purification,  growth, 
and  perfection,  in  order  to  secure  perfect  remission. 
Because  forgiveness  is  not  granted,  save  to  the  contrite; 

VOL.  I — 18 


274  Wessel  Gansfort 

it  is  granted  to  everyone  who  is  reformed  in  so  far  as  he 
is  reformed;  and  it  is  proportioned  to  his  reformation. 
Many  sins  are  forgiven  unto  him  who  loves  much ;  but 
they  are  not  perfectly  forgiven,  unless  he  loves  per- 
fectly. For  plenary  remission  and  perfect  remission  are 
identical. 

No  one,  however,  is  so  perfect  in  this  life  as  to  be 
without  sin.  Therefore  plenary  remission  is  granted  to 
no  one  in  this  life.  For  no  one  obtains  plenary  remission, 
unless  Christ — though  absent  to  the  sight — is  present 
and  through  faith  prepares  him  a  place  in  his  Father's 
house, — perfectly  prepares  a  perfect  place  for  him.  Jesus 
has  withdrawn  from  the  sense  of  sight,  but  he  remains 
within  our  spiritual  vision;  for  through  faith  he  dwells  in 
our  hearts.  But  the  pope  is  not  aware  of  the  preparation 
of  this  place  in  the  Father's  house.  Hence  he  has  no 
power  to  command  anyone  to  be  received  in  the  place 
that  has  been  prepared.  More  than  that,  the  pope  him- 
self, who  knows  the  inmost  workings  of  his  own  heart 
better  than  all  other  men,  does  not  know  as  regards  even 
himself  how  far  his  place  in  that  house  of  the  Father  is  or 
is  not  prepared.  He  knows  not  how  to  pray  as  he  ought, 
so  long  as  he  is  not  made  perfect  in  the  wisdom  of  God. 
But  advancing  gradually,  he  learns  by  degrees  what  and 
how  he  ought  to  pray. 

(A  few  years  ago  I  sent  our  venerable  Master  several 
propositions,  in  which  I  thought  my  position  was  made 
sufficiently  clear.  If  they  were  not  received,  or  if  they 
do  not  please  him,  kindly  let  me  know  and  thus  gratify 
me.) 

I  think  it  has  been  very  loosely  said  that  a  person's 
sins  may  be  forgiven  and  still  not  be  covered  in  the  sight 
of  God.  For  how  are  his  sins  covered,  if  they  are  still 
imputed  unto  him  for  punishment?  But  how  are  they 
not  imputed  unto  him,  when  he  is  punished  for  them?     Is 


Wessel  to  Engelbert  275 

it  possible  that  the  Lord  has  forgiven  him,  in  order  that 
the  pope  may  hold  him  for  punishment? 

To  you,  however,  these  considerations  do  not  seem  to  be 
reasons;  or  else — if  I  judge  from  your  wish — I  am  to  regard 
them  as  having  greater  authority  than  the  gospel  and  the 
Church.  Hence  it  follows  that  either  these  are  no  reasons 
or  they  have  greater  weight  than  that  high  authority.  It 
seems  to  me,  good  sir,  that  you  are  very  rash  in  expressing 
an  opinion  which  is  so  readily  refuted  from  one  side  or  the 
other.  Therefore,  be  more  prudent  and  cautious  in  de- 
ciding as  to  the  rest.  And  if  anything  in  these  statements 
of  mine  does  not  please  you,  confer  with  our  venerable 
Master  and  reply  in  faithful  accordance  with  his  direction. 
All  my  work  will  be  worth  while,  if  I  merit  a  reply  of  any 
sort  from  that  beloved  man.  The  one  letter  which  he 
sent  me  is  often  in  my  hand  and  before  my  eyes.  I  wish 
him  happiness  and  health,  and  I  wish  the  same  to  you,  my 
once  beloved  father  and  most  respected  Master. 

Written  at  Pancratium,  the  very  place  where  I  received 
the  letter  which  you  dispatched  on  the  nth  day  before 
the  calends  of  May. 


XII 

LETTER  FROM  JACOB  HOECK  TO  WESSEL 

Jacob  Hoeck,  Dean  of  Naeldwick,  sends  greetings  to 
Master  Wessel. 

Be  assured,  most  worthy  Wessel,  that  for  a  long  time  I 
have  been  no  less  desirous  to  write  to  you  than  you  have 
been  to  receive  a  letter  from  me.  But  I  either  had  no 
messenger,  or — as  happened  more  often — I  was  of  neces- 
sity so  busy  in  the  tumult  of  secular  matters  that  I  had  no 
time  whatever  to  give  attention  to  what  you  had  written 
me,  had  I  leisure  for  meditation.  In  fact  it  is  because  of 
my  disposition  to  oblige  that  I  fall  into  these  snares;  for 
I  do  not  know  how  to  refuse  any  request  at  all.  But  now, 
having  obtained  a  good  messenger  to  carry  my  letters,  I 
have  snatched  enough  time  from  sleep  to  set  down  my 
thought  concerning  you  and  your  propositions,  albeit 
only  in  a  rough  and  disorderly  fashion. 

And  first  of  all,  I  desire  you  to  know  that  I  have  been  in 
no  wise  deceived  in  you,  inasmuch  as  from  personal  ex- 
perience with  you  and  from  the  perusal  of  your  writings 
I  have  found  you  to  be  greater  than  the  report  of  many 
great  men  had  led  me  to  believe.  From  your  letters, 
however,  I  gather  that  you  have  one  characteristic  which 
in  my  opinion  is  extremely  unsuited  to  a  great  man.  This 
is  that  you  pride  yourself  on  your  obstinacy  and  are  bent 
upon  having  men  find  a  certain  singularity  in  all  your 
statements,  so  that  in  the  judgment  of  many  persons  you 

276 


Jacob  Hoeck  to  Wessel  277 

are  rightly  called  "The  Master  of  Contradiction."  And 
unquestionably,  in  view  of  your  being  a  most  learned  man, 
your  singularity  gives  offense  to  many.  I  frankly  admit 
that  I  am  of  an  opposite  disposition,  in  that  I  am  not  ac- 
customed, except  for  very  strong  reasons,  to  abandon  the 
common  paths  of  the  ancient  Fathers,  defending  rather 
than  attacking  them.  You  remember,  I  doubt  not,  that 
that  distinguished  man  of  our  times,  Buridanus,  occupied 
the  same  position,  for  in  the  preface  to  his  Ethics  he  says 
that  he  has  often  been  deceived  by  the  inventions  of 
modern  men,  but  never  by  the  traditions  of  the  ancients. 

On  the  subject  of  indulgences,  I  cannot  but  differ  with 
you;  but  I  do  not  intend  to  assail  you  with  arguments. 
For,  I  ask,  what  hope  can  I  have  of  subduing  with  argu- 
ments that  hard,  unconquerable,  undaunted  head  of 
yours,  which  yields  neither  to  the  hammer  of  common 
belief  nor  to  the  sword  of  the  authority  of  the  ancient 
Fathers?  I  shall  merely  set  forth  my  own  opinion  and 
judgment  in  the  briefest  possible  manner. 

It  is  true  that  no  explicit  statement  concerning  indul- 
gences can  be  drawn  from  Sacred  Scripture  and  that  noth- 
ing concerning  them  was  written  by  the  ancient  Doctors, 
although  it  may  be  said,  though  I  have  not  read  it  any- 
where, that  Gregory  established  septennial  indulgences  in 
connection  with  the  Roman  stations.  Nevertheless  I 
dare  not,  and  I  ought  not,  on  this  account  to  express  the 
opinion — as  you  do — that  the  prelates,  who  practice  and 
observe  this  custom,  err.  And  really  (not  to  conceal 
anything  from  you) ,  it  was  because  I  was  horrified  at  this 
unheard-of  truth  that  I  at  first  ceased  to  write  to  you, 
although  I  always  hoped  that  you  had  announced  this 
view  for  the  sake  of  discussing  and  investigating  the  truth 
rather  than  by  way  of  positive  assertion.  For  you  ought 
not  to  be  moved  to  a  positive  assertion  on  the  ground  that 
nothing  is  to  be  found  concerning  indulgences  in  Sacred 


278  Wessel  Gansfort 

Scripture  and  in  the  manifest  teachings  of  the  apostles; 
because  you  know  that  there  are  very  many  doctrines, 
which  one  must  no  less  believe  under  penalty  of  fire  than 
those  which  are  contained  in  the  aforesaid  rule  of  faith. 
For  "many  things,"  says  the  Evangelist,  "did  Jesus, 
which  are  not  written  in  this  book."  And  this — to  pass 
over  the  rest — is  one  of  those  things ;  for  Peter  was  at  Rome. 

I  have  no  doubt  that  you  believe  that  sacramental  con- 
fession is  necessary  to  salvation.  Yet,  I  do  not  know 
whether  you  would  be  really  able  to  establish  it  unques- 
tionably in  the  rule  of  faith.  I  know  that  a  number  of 
Doctors  have  tried  to  do  this.  But  whether  they  properly 
established  their  point  so  as  to  convince  a  stiff-necked 
man,  I  leave  it  to  you  to  judge.  I  have  seen  no  one  that 
satisfied  me  on  this  point,  except  Scotus.  Still  I  should 
not  be  unwilling  to  say  (and  some  persons  are  of  this 
opinion)  that  although  the  obligation  of  sacramental  con- 
fession was  not  mentioned  in  the  books  of  the  Evangelists, 
yet  the  apostles  heard  it  from  Christ,  and  that  it  has  come 
down  to  us  from  the  apostles  by  the  authority  of  the 
Church,  on  which,  as  you  must  admit,  you  should  place 
much  dependence.  Some  of  us  would  make  the  same 
assertion  in  regard  to  indulgences.  You  see  whither 
these  things  tend.  As  for  myself, — on  this  point  at  any 
rate,  as  the  basis  and  foundation  of  our  knowledge, — I 
heartily  oppose  you,  firmly  believing  and  asserting  that 
the  pope  can  decree,  not  only  one  hour,  but  many  years 
of  indulgences,  and  even  plenary  indulgence. 

And  yet  you  cannot  believe  me  to  be  so  foolish  as  to 
agree  with  most  persons  in  thinking  that  whatever  the 
pope  decides  in  such  matters  shall  stand  unshaken,  even 
if  he  is  deranged  while  thus  deciding.  In  a  matter  of  this 
sort,  that  only  is  fixed  which  he  decides,  provided  the  key 
is  not  in  error  and  Christ  does  not  reject  it.  There  comes 
to  my  mind  the  word  of  a  man  of  admirable  caution  and 


Jacob  Hoeck  to  Wessel  279 

very  great  knowledge,  our  Master  Thomas  de  Cursellis 
(whom  you,  I  believe,  knew  better  at  Paris  as  the  Dean 
of  Our  Lady);  for  to  certain  persons  in  the  Council  of 
Basel,  who  were  unduly  extending  the  pope's  authority, 
he  is  reported  to  have  said,  "Christ  declared  to  Peter: 
'Whatsoever  thou  shalt  bind  on  earth  shall  be  bound'; 
but  not,  'Whatsoever  thou  shalt  say  is  bound.'" 

Perhaps  you  will  say,  "A  statement  does  not  suffice 
unless  one  adds  the  reason  for  it. "  Really,  my  dear  Wes- 
sel, you  ought  to  regard  as  a  strong  reason — nay  as 
stronger  than  any  reason — the  authority,  not  only  of  the 
pope,  but  also  of  all  the  prelates  and  Doctors,  who  either 
grant  indulgences  of  all  kind,  or  write  and  teach  that  they 
ought  to  be  granted.  You  recall  the  words  of  Augustine, 
"I  would  not  believe  the  gospel,  if  the  authority  of  the 
Church  did  not  compel  me  to  do  so. "  Do  not  most  of  the 
chapters  in  the  body  of  the  law  approved  by  the  Church 
also  speak  of  indulgences?  Does  not  the  venerable  Ger- 
son  seem  to  be  of  the  same  opinion,  when  he  says,  that  the 
granting  of  indulgences  ought  not  to  be  lightly  esteemed, 
but  rather  ought  to  be  devoutly  considered  in  the  faith, 
hope,  and  love  of  Christ,  who  gave  such  authority  to  men  ? 
"For,"  to  continue  with  his  words,  "it  is  certain  that, 
other  things  being  equal,  work  that  is  based  on  such  in- 
centives is  more  fruitful  and  acceptable  than  any  that  is 
not."  "Therefore,"  he  himself  adds,  "it  is  sound  and 
sober  wisdom  for  a  pious  man  to  desire  to  secure  such 
indulgences,  without  entering  into  any  inquisitive  dis- 
cussion of  their  precise  and  sure  value. " 

This  same  Gerson,  in  the  beginning  of  the  little  work  he 
wrote  on  indulgences,  towards  the  end  of  which  the  afore- 
said words  are  found,  seems  to  be  willing  to  base  and  estab- 
lish pontifical  authority  of  this  sort  on  the  Sacred  Gospel. 
For,  after  citing  the  verse  from  Matt,  xviii,  "Whatso- 
ever ye   shall  bind,"   etc.,   together  with  several  other 


28o  Wessel  Gansfort 

passages  of  the  vSacred  Gospel,  he  says,  "Finally  all  power 
of  conferring  indulgences  is  based  upon  the  foregoing." 
And  although  this  honored  Doctor  thinks  (and  indeed 
rightly  in  my  opinion)  that  no  man,  however  pure,  or 
even  the  entire  Church,  can  bind  a  person  in  any  way  to 
mortal  sin ;  yet — contrary  to  your  judgment — he  seems  to 
wish  that  the  dictum  of  Christ,  "Whatsoever  ye  shall 
bind  on  earth, "  be  understood  as  pertaining  not  to  sins, 
but  to  penalties.  In  company  with  these  men  I  declare 
and  teach  the  above  as  the  truth.  And  so,  on  this  subject, 
as  the  chief  point  of  our  contention  you  have  now  learned 
my  judgment,  which — taking  into  consideration  the  char- 
acter of  my  authorities — certainly  has  some  value. 

For  my  opinion  in  regard  to  indulgences  is  as  follows: 
In  sacramental  confession,  which  sometimes  makes  the 
attrite  person  contrite,  the  everlasting  punishment  that 
is  due  for  mortal  sin  is  changed  to  temporal.  Until  this 
temporal  punishment  is  computed  and  imposed  by  the 
priest,  I  think  it  is  before  the  bar  of  God,  and  not  before 
that  of  the  pope.  But  when  it  is  actually  imposed,  and 
the  penitent — by  the  virtue  of  the  keys — is  obligated 
thereto,  then  I  consider  that  the  case  is  before  the  bar  of 
the  Church.  The  Church  has  authority  over  it ;  not  that 
the  decision  lies  with  the  pope,  so  that  whatever  he  decrees 
in  such  cases  holds  at  the  bar  of  God  because  the  pope  so 
willed  it,  not  that  the  pope  can  remit  that  punishment 
according  to  his  will  and  pleasure;  but  because  he  can 
render  satisfaction  for  such  a  person  out  of  the  treasure  of 
the  Church,  and  can  substitute  the  merits  of  the  saints 
and  especially  of  Christ's  suffering  for  such  punishments. 
Nor  is  this  assertion  of  mine  proven  false  by  your  proposi- 
tions, which  were  handed  to  me  by  my  preceptor,  Engel- 
bert  of  Leyden.  For  in  these  you  seem  to  use  the  words, 
"participation  in  the  treasure,"  very  differently  from  the 
Doctors  of  the  Church  in  general,  with  the  result  that  you 


Jacob  Hoeck  to  Wessel  281 

take  issue  with  them,  not  as  to  the  fact,  but  merely  as  to 
the  words !  Everyone  concedes,  with  you,  that  the  pope 
cannot  bestow  grace  upon  anyone,  nor  even  decide 
whether  he  or  anyone  else  is  in  grace.  Much  less  can  he 
command  that  anyone  should  be  in  grace.  But  that  your 
conclusion  (intentio)  can  be  drawn  from  these  concessions, 
I  confess  I  do  not  see.  For  the  only  inference  to  be  made 
from  them  is  that  the  pope  can  neither  qualify  a  man  for 
indulgences,  nor  can  he  with  certitude  decide  that  he  is 
qualified.  This  again  everyone  affirms  with  you.  Never- 
theless, all  these  premises  or  antecedents  of  yours  actually 
lead,  not  to  the  consequent  you  deduce  from  them,  but  to 
its  opposite,  viz.  that  the  pope  can  confer  an  indulgence, 
in  the  manner  aforesaid,  upon  a  truly  contrite  man  who 
has  confessed  and  fulfilled  the  required  conditions, — or 
that,  if  the  pope  so  decides  it,  he  can  even  confer  a  plen- 
ary indulgence,  so  that  such  persons  when  released  from 
the  flesh  will  escape  forthwith  to  the  Kingdom. 

And  if  with  us  you  thus  exalt  the  Church  of  our  pilgrim- 
age, you  need  not  fear  that  you  will  blaspheme  the  King 
or  give  offense  to  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven.  For  the  im- 
purity which  you  seem  unwilling  to  admit  into  that  most 
beautiful  Kingdom  arises  in  large  part  from  the  burden- 
some weight  of  the  body  upon  the  soul,  and  when  the 
flesh  is  laid  aside,  it  is  forthwith  washed  away,  and  dis- 
appears. There  are  no  impure  thoughts  then  in  the  soul, 
and  little  of  folly  or  cowardice  or  sloth.  As  for  the  defer- 
ment of  holy  desires,  which  you  rightly  say  is  the  heaviest 
affliction  for  one  who  loves,  God  Himself  takes  that  away 
by  revealing  the  object  of  the  desire.  Neither  is  there  any 
impure  love  there.  But  all  things  there  are  beautiful,  all 
things  are  perfect  of  their  kind.  Nothing  impure  or  im- 
perfect exists  there.  And  so  it  is  not  necessary  for  the 
soul  that  has  gained  plenary  indulgence  to  be  detained  in 
purgatory  to  wash  away  that  impurity  or  to  be  kept  from 


282  Wessel  Gansfort 

escaping  at  once,  provided  one  dies  in  that  state.  Theo- 
logians call  it  purgatory,  not  because  one  there  is  purged 
from  impurity,  but  rather  is  cleared  from  the  punishments 
which  are  there  paid. 

But  although  what  I  have  said  is  possible  and  ought  to 
be  taught  and  preached  to  the  people,  yet  I  can  scarcely 
believe  that  even  one  out  of  a  hundred  thousand  souls 
escapes  immediately ;  and  it  is  only  as  something  peculiarly 
grand  and  glorious  that  I  am  accustomed  to  declare  that 
this  befell  the  most  blessed  Mother  of  God.  For  possibly, 
or  rather  surely,  a  man  expecting  to  obtain  an  indulgence 
has  some  sin  which  he  has  not  confessed  either  through 
forgetfulness  or  carelessness,  for  which  he  will  suffer  pun- 
ishment in  purgatory,  unless  he  pays  it  here.  Besides, 
who  is  there  that  dies  at  the  very  moment  he  gets  the 
indulgence  ?  Or  rather  who  is  there,  that  after  obtaining 
one  does  not  commit  a  sin  of  commission  or  omission? 
Moreover,  all  persons,  as  your  own  propositions  clearly 
seem  to  intimate,  remain  in  venial  sin  and  transgress  daily. 
In  fact,  no  one  asserts  that  these  sins  that  remain  have 
been  forgiven.  Nevertheless,  the  following  condition 
with  its  conclusion  remains  true:  that  if  anyone,  being 
truly  and  altogether  contrite,  confesses,  and  fulfills  the 
work  required  by  the  indulgence,  the  pope  can  grant  him 
a  share  in  the  treasure  of  the  Church.  Therefore,  if  he  is 
entirely  contrite,  and  dies  without  committing  any  new 
sin,  he  will  escape  at  once.  Such  was  the  indulgence  that 
the  supreme  Pope,  Christ,  bestowed  upon  the  thief  on  the 
cross. 

Nor  ought  you,  a  learned  man,  to  be  surprised  at  these 
statements,  since  according  to  all  the  authorities  contrition 
may  be  so  great  as  to  wipe  out  all  guilt  and  punishment, 
and  make  it  possible  to  escape  to  the  Kingdom  without  any 
delay.  Even  an  adult,  however  sinful  and  unlike  Christ 
he  may  be,  if  he  dies  as  soon  as  he  is  baptized,  will  appear 


Jacob  Hoeck  to  Wessel  283 

immediately  in  the  Kingdom,  white  and  pure  and  per- 
fectly formed  in  Christ.  Nor  as  you  seem  to  dread  will 
he  make  the  Kingdom  impure  and  turbulent  by  his  recep- 
tion there.  Yet,  if  he  had  survived,  he  would  have  had 
need  of  much  travail  before  Christ  was  formed  in  him. 

I  see  that  my  paper  is  failing  and  so  I  stop.  My 
statements  concerning  you  and  your  propositions  I  have 
written  hastily  and  in  the  midst  of  distractions,  interrupted 
by  the  manifold  and  diverse  variety  of  my  occupations. 
I  beg  you,  since  you  are  less  occupied,  and  therefore  hap- 
pier, to  weigh  what  I  have  written  rather  confusedly 
because  busy  and  intent  upon  other  matters,  and  to  write 
me  again  as  soon  as  possible.  It  will  be  your  task  to 
extract  from  this  letter  the  things  on  which  we  agree  and 
disagree,  and  to  bring  us  to  the  point  of  profitable  argu- 
ment. The  Doctors  of  our  school  of  truth,  although  they 
may  be  called  Nominalists,  usually  do  this  better  than 
those  who  are  called  Realists.  And  when  this  has  been 
done,  together  with  you  I  will  gladly  aim  the  arrows  of 
our  authorities  at  such  error,  as  though  it  were  a  Roman 
standard.  For  the  result  of  our  compact,  I  hope,  will  be 
that  at  last  the  truth  may  be  readily  discovered  in  the  most 
difficult  questions. 

God  has  not  given  me  the  leisure  that  he  has  given  to 
you,  Wessel.  Nevertheless,  I  shall  not  postpone  writing 
hereafter.  As  soon  as  I  receive  your  letters,  I  shall 
always  write.  After  this  I  cannot  be  so  busy  but  that, 
as  I  have  promised  you  once,  twice,  and  even  the  third 
time,  I  shall  always  reply  to  your  writings  without  delay, 
at  least  by  dictating  a  little.  Meanwhile,  my  dearest 
Master;  Farewell. 

Truly,  your  Dean,  as  you  fully  deserve. 

Naeldwick,  the  9th  day  before  the  calends  of  August. 


XIIT 

A  LETTER  CONCERNING  INDULGENCES  BY  THE  VENERABLE 
MASTER  WESSEL  OF  GRONINGEN  IN  REPLY  TO  MASTER 
JACOB  HOECK,  DEAN  OF  NAELDWICK 

May  he,  who  promised  to  be  in  the  midst  of  those  gath- 
ered in  his  name,  be  present  in  our  conferences  with  his 
saving  grace. 

I  thank  you,  my  most  worthy  Master,  for  your  esteem  as 
well  as  for  your  long-desired  opinion  concerning  me.  And 
in  order  that  you  may  discern  my  opinion  better  and  more 
clearly,  I — although  averse  to  labor — have  decided  to 
reply  at  considerable  length  to  your  longed-for  letter. 
Drawn  by  my  desire  to  search  into  the  truth,  I  ought  not 
to  be  lazy,  when  an  orthodox  Doctor,  and  moreover  one 
most  devoted  to  and  zealous  for  the  truth,  not  only  offers 
but  seeks  to  confer  with  me,  as  I  have  long  desired. 

I  especially  ask  and  beseech  you  by  the  twofold  law  of 
love  not  to  regard  my  singularity  as  ostentation, — as 
though  I  strove  to  secure  a  certain  novelty  in  all  my  words. 
For  if  you  could  discern  my  mind  and  soul,  you  would 
surely  judge  that  it  was  not  ostentation,  but  rather  humil- 
ity, with  which  in  penitent  prayer  before  God  I  often 
knock  at  the  ear  of  his  mercy,  lest,  on  account  of  my 
stiff neckedness,  of  which  I  sometimes  justly  suspect  my- 
self, he  may  permit  me  to  be  led  away  into  some  false 
view.  Believe  me,  if  I  err,  I  am  led  astray  not  so  much 
by  willfullness  as  by  dullness  of  mind. 

Meanwhile,  I  have  the  calm  and  assured  consciousness 

284 


Wessel  to  Jacob  Hoeck  285 

that  I  have  always  sought,  and  still  seek,  the  truth  of  the 
faith  with  deep  concern.  And  when  I  find  it,  not  only 
through  such  learned  and  highly  esteemed  men  as  your- 
self, but  indeed  through  anyone, — be  he  most  humble — 
yes  even  by  myself,  I  am  always  ready  to  be  corrected 
and  to  admit  my  error. 

This  I  showed  by  what  I  did  more  than  once  at  Paris. 
First,  when,  being  called  to  Heidelberg,  I  disregarded  the 
large  promises  of  personal  advantage  which  the  Count 
Palatine  offered  me  through  the  so-called  Quappo,  pro 
tempore  Confessor  of  the  Lord  Archbishop  of  Cologne, 
and  hastened  to  Paris  with  no  other  intention  and  purpose 
than,  as  a  new  and  "singular"  contestant,  to  confute  the 
opinions  of  those  two  most  famous  Masters,  Henry  Zomeren 
and  Nicolaus  of  Utrecht,  and  win  them  from  the  views  of 
the  Formalists  to  those  of  the  Realists,  to  which  I  sub- 
scribed. This,  however,  I  admit  was  arrogance  on  my 
part.  But  after  meeting  stronger  men  than  myself,  I 
perceived  my  own  weakness ;  and  before  three  months  had 
passed,  I  yielded  my  opinion,  and  forthwith  with  all  zeal 
searched  the  books  of  Scotus,  Maro,  and  Bonetus, — writers 
who  I  had  learned  were  the  leaders  in  that  school.  Not 
content  with  that,  before  I  had  spent  a  year  in  studying 
as  diligently  and  thoughtfully  as  I  could  the  doctrines  of 
Scotus,  with  which  I  began,  I  discovered  graver  errors  in 
those  than  in  the  teachings  of  the  ReaHsts,  and  being  ready 
to  be  corrected,  I  again  changed  my  opinion  and  joined 
the  Nominalists.  And  I  frankly  confess,  that  if  I  thought 
the  latter  held  any  views  contrary  to  the  faith,  I  am  pre- 
pared to-day  to  return  to  either  the  Formalists  or  the 
Realists.  Ajid  this  is  in  accord  with  the  opinion  expressed 
by  the  blessed  Augustine,  xxiv  q.  iii  c.  dicit  Apostolus 
"Even  if  I  do  not  acquiesce  at  once,  I  am  not  conscious 
of  any  stubbornness,  when  on  account  of  my  dullness  I 
do  not  understand  what  others  can  accept  more  quickly 


286  Wessel  Gansfort 

and  clearly. "  To  my  mind  the  famous  St.  Jerome  was  as 
holy  in  argument  and  example  as  he  was  orthodox  and 
catholic  in  his  views.  Yet,  when  he  fell  into  a  great  and 
dangerous  error  that  undermined  the  authority  of  all  Can- 
onical Scripture  and  was  therefore  worse  than  the  error 
of  Arius  or  Sabellius,  he  did  not  yield  to  the  admonition  of 
Augustine,  but  wrote  a  reply  in  defense  of  his  opinion  and 
in  opposition  to  Augustine.  Perhaps  you  will  say  it  does 
not  follow  that  there  is  any  truce  to  be  granted  to-day. 
I  do  not  dispute  that.  Nevertheless  the  precedent  that 
was  established  is  sufficient  for  my  position.  If  indeed  his 
scrupulous  anxiety  in  searching  into  the  truth,  since  he  was 
sincere,  defended  St.  Jerome  from  heresy,  I  do  not  believe 
that  anyone  is  a  heretic,  who  with  solicitude  seeks  the 
truth,  and  on  finding  it  accepts  it  with  equal  promptness. 

CHAPTER  I 

You  assert — and  I  do  not  deny  it — that  this  singularity 
of  mine  ojEf ends  many.  Yet  I  am  no  less  disturbed  by  their 
offense,  against  which,  not  to-day  but  thirty-three  years 
ago,  and  with  no  striving  after  singularity,  but  rather,  as 
it  seems  to  me,  because  I  was  irresistibly  carried  away  with 
zeal  for  the  truth,  I  repeatedly  maintained  before  all  the 
learned  men  at  Paris  that  from  boyhood  it  had  always 
seemed  to  me  absurd  and  unworthy  to  believe  that  any 
man  by  his  own  verdict  can  increase  the  value  of  a  good 
work  in  the  sight  of  God, — for  example  doubling  its  value 
— simply  through  the  accession  or  intervention  of  a  human 
decree. 

You  admit  that  for  very  important  reasons  you  some- 
times abandon  the  ancient  paths  of  the  Fathers.  Do  you, 
then,  consider  as  trivial  and  vain  the  reasons,  on  account 
of  which  the  Fathers  before  Albert  and  Thomas,  as  they 
themselves   testify   in   writing,    abandoned   this   strange 


Wessel  to  Jacob  Hoeck  287 

doctrine  of  indulgences?  For  they  declared  that  it  was 
nothing  but  a  pious  fraud  and  a  deceit  with  no  evil  intent, 
by  which — through  an  error  growing  out  of  kindness — 
the  people  might  be  drawn  toward  piety.  In  those  times, 
therefore,  it  was  not  believed  by  all  men;  and  since  the 
Fathers  who  held  this  view  sought  the  truth  with  sincere 
solicitude,  they  were  not  heretics.  To  me,  indeed,  their 
reasons  do  not  seem  unimportant,  for  they  abandoned  the 
probable  opinions  of  the  pontiffs,  because  they  felt  com- 
pelled to  admit  the  undoubted  authority  of  Scripture. 
Let  me  state  it  more  plainly:  So  long  as  the  pope  or  a 
School  or  any  large  number  of  men  make  assertions  con- 
trary to  the  truth  of  Scripture,  it  should  always  be  my 
first  anxiety  to  adhere  to  the  truth  of  Scripture ;  and  in  the 
second  place,  inasmuch  as  it  is  not  probable  that  such 
great  men  are  mistaken,  I  ought  most  carefully  to  investi- 
gate the  truth  on  both  sides;  but  always  with  greater 
reverence  for  the  Sacred  Canon  than  for  the  assertions  of 
men,  whoever  they  may  be. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  mention  what  great  errors  on  the 
subject  of  indulgences  the  Roman  court  rashly  assumed  to 
be  true  and  perniciously  pubUshed, — harmful  errors,  which 
would  be  spreading  to-day  had  not  the  sane  sternness  of  a 
few  true  theologians  stood  in  their  way.  You  yourself 
are  a  witness  and  proof  in  these  abuses,  which  you  either 
saw  at  Paris  or  on  your  return  practiced  and  permitted  in 
the  fatherland.  You  know  whether  it  was  piety  founded 
upon  a  firm  rock  that  caused  you  opposition.  You  know 
what  reverence  is  due  to  ecclesiastical  authority,  and  what 
to  the  catholic  faith.  You  hold  to  an  almost  totally  new 
distinction  on  this  matter. 

CHAPTER  II 

In  order  to  add  to  the  authority  of  the  ancients,  you  cite 
the  famous  Buridanus,  as  an  important  witness  to  the 


288  Wessel  Gansfort 

truth.  And  in  this  you  truly  are  generous,  since  you  grant 
me  both  the  Hberty  and  the  incentive  of  following  a  great 
man,  who  speaks  favorably  and  justly  in  behalf  of  ancient 
writers, — or  rather  the  more  ancient  writers  whose  merit 
has  been  better  tested  and  approved  in  coming  down  to  us. 
For,  when  he  says  that  he  was  never  deceived  by  the 
traditions  of  the  ancients,  did  he  allude  in  any  way  to 
Albert,  Thomas,  or  Scotus,  or  to  any  one  of  the  entire 
School  of  the  Realists  or  Formalists  ?  As  a  matter  of  fact 
he  regarded  all  these  as  belonging  to  the  new  School,  and 
almost  his  contemporaries.  This  is  quite  clear  through 
the  entire  course  of  his  brilliant  work.  Wherever  any- 
thing problematic  occurs  he  defines  it,  not  by  the  opinion 
of  these  writers,  but  by  that  of  the  Nominalists.  Hence, 
the  ancients,  by  whose  opinions  he — especially  in  his 
Morales — admits  that  he  was  never  deceived,  are,  not 
these,  but  other  men. 

"On  the  subject  of  indulgences  you  cannot  but  differ 
with  me";  but  still  you  do  not  intend  to  assail  me  with 
arguments,  having  no  "hope  of  subduing  by  arguments  my 
hard  head,  which  will  yield  neither  to  the  hammer  of 
common  belief  nor  to  the  sword  of  the  authority  of  the 
ancient  writers. "  How  is  it,  good  sir,  that  you  say  you 
will  not  contend  with  arguments,  as  though  I  have  merely 
adduced  reason,  and  not  faith! 

I  have  touched  upon  the  authority  of  the  ancients  to 
some  extent,  and  will  refer  to  it  further  when  it  is  more 
opportune.  But  I  see  that  the  matter  of  ' '  common  belief  " 
must  be  discussed  more  carefully,  first  with  reference  to 
the  declaration  of  your  own  personal  belief,  then  of  the 
belief  of  the  School,  but  especially  that  of  the  Christian 
religion.  As  for  yourself,  further  on  you  openly  assert 
that  no  one  can  decide  with  certitude;  nor  are  you  "so 
foolish  as  to  agree  with  most  persons  that  whatever  the 
pope  decides  in  such  matters  shall  stand  unshaken,  if  he 


Wessel  to  Jacob  Hoeck  289 

be  deranged."  You  admit  that  "these  statements  are 
fixed,  only  when  the  key  is  not  in  error  and  Christ  does  not 
reject  them."  As  though  even  the  ministry  of  perfect 
love,  inspired  in  the  hearts  of  the  faithful  by  the  Holy 
Spirit,  which  Augustine  defines  as  the  only  key  of  the 
kingdom,  could  be  in  error  or  Christ  could  ever  reject  the 
ministry  of  such  a  key ! 

CHAPTER  III 

You  cite  the  distinguished  and  venerable  Gerson,  who 
is  worthy  to  be  cited  and  to  be  considered ;  for  he  strongly 
condemns  many  things  in  the  abuse  of  indulgences.  In 
the  first  place,  in  referring  them  chiefly  to  the  authority  of 
office  rather  than  of  jurisdiction,  he  says  that  in  indul- 
gences the  former  is  more  evident,  more  useful,  more 
suitable.  If  this  statement  of  that  great  man  is  strictly 
interpreted,  in  accordance  with  the  truth  it  contains,  does 
not  the  status  of  all  indulgences  as  well  as  every  assertion 
concerning  them  totter  at  once  ?  For  it  declares  that  the 
ministry  of  his  office  on  the  part  of  a  simple  pastor  or 
priest — through  properly  prescribed  sacramentals — effects 
a  more  suitable,  more  useful,  more  evident,  and  thereby  a 
closer  approach  to  plenary  remission  than  can  be  ac- 
complished by  all  the  plenitude  of  papal  jurisdiction. 

He  also  admits  that  men  vary  in  their  teaching  concern- 
ing indulgences.  Therefore  there  is  no  single  unvarying 
doctrine  at  all  concerning  them.  Now  such  variety  of 
belief  is  not  catholic ;  but  rather  tends  to  produce  faction ; 
for  individual  views  beget  individualism.  But  if  you 
closely  examine  these  brief  statements  of  Gerson's,  you 
will  see  that  they  grant  the  pope  no  authority  whatever 
except  through  special  papal  jurisdiction,  priestly  office, 
or  filial  adoption.  For  we  find  these  three  sources  of 
authority  in  the  Church.     The  third  belongs  peculiarly 

VOL.  1—19 


290  Wessel  Gansfort 

to  the  sons  of  adoption;  and  therefore  the  two  remaining 
are  for  the  Church's  edification.  According  to  Ambrose, 
an  elder  or  a  bishop  does  indeed  exhibit  his  ministry  in  the 
authority  of  his  office,  but  he  does  not  exercise  the  rights 
of  any  authority.  If  therefore  by  reason  of  the  authority 
of  his  office  the  pope  has  any  power,  he  has  it  through 
jurisdiction.  And  according  to  the  same  Gerson,  by 
that  power  he  cannot  directly  and  principally  lessen  any 
penalty  except  that  which  he  himself  can  inflict,  such  as 
excommunication,  suspension,  disqualification,  depriva- 
tion, or  irregularity. 

Furthermore,  the  same  Doctor  holds  that  only  the 
supreme  pontiff,  Christ  (excluding  therefore  the  Roman 
pontiff),  together  with  the  Father  and  the  Holy  Spirit, 
can  grant  omnimodal  indulgence  from  punishment  and 
guilt  with  plenary  authority;  and,  in  granting  this,  he 
at  the  same  time  grants  innumerable  days  and  countless 
years  of  indulgence.  In  this  weighty  statement, — al- 
though added  as  if  something  unimportant, — you  will 
discover  the  error  of  plenary  remission;  for  it  is  as 
if  he  said  the  pope  has  no  such  immense  plenitude  of 
power. 

The  fundamental  intention  of  the  doctrine  of  indul- 
gences is  very  strongly  opposed  by  the  word  of  this  same 
venerable  man,  when  he  says,  and  says  truly,  that,  in  the 
justification  of  an  unrighteous  man  grace  is  necessarily 
imparted  to  him  before  his  sin  is  forgiven;  and  further 
that  his  guilt  is  forgiven  before  his  sin.  The  reason  under- 
lying the  first  statement  is  that  his  "privation"  is  not 
removed  except  by  a  change  in  his  fundamental  character 
{habitus).  The  reason  for  the  second  is  that  the  law  does 
not  punish  anything  except  transgression.  Therefore, 
when  the  transgression  ceases,  the  punishment  also  will 
cease.  Hence  no  guilt  remains  after  a  sin  has  been  per- 
fectly forgiven.     For  the  entire  cause  of  the  guilt  is 


Wessel  to  Jacob  Hoeck  291 

the  sin  or  transgression.  Therefore  it  is  estabHshed  or 
annulled  convertibly  in  connection  with  the  latter. 

Besides  the  same  venerable  theologian  expressly  dis- 
approves of  indulgences  of  many  years,  which  were  found 
everyivhere  in  the  different  concessions  of  the  Roman 
pontiffs, — calling  this  an  enormity.  He  therefore  brands 
the  pope  with  error,  when  he  refers  to  the  baseness  of 
quaestors,  and  also  when  he  asserts  that  general  indul- 
gences can  scarcely  save  from  sin,  declaring  that  a  dona- 
tion is  invalid,  if  it  extends  beyond  the  measure  of  the 
obligation.  And  holding  to  his  former  fundamental  pro- 
position that  the  pope  cannot  lighten  any  punishment 
except  that  which  he  himself  can  inflict,  he  adds — to 
enforce  that  statement — that  no  minister  of  the  Church 
can  bind  anyone,  except  for  temporal  punishment. 

The  same  venerable  theologian  recommends  that  the 
pope  moderate  his  indulgences,  lest  they  detract  from  both 
divine  justice  and  mercy.  If  this  counsel  is  sound — as  it 
undoubtedly  is — it  is  not  given  with  regard  to  anything 
impossible  or  unavoidable;  for  counsel  cannot  apply  to 
such  things.  Hence  the  pope  through  his  indulgences  can 
detract  from  divine  justice  and  mercy.  This,  however, 
is  impossible  without  doing  violence  to  divine  wisdom. 
But  he  cannot  do  violence  to  divine  wisdom  except  by  his 
own  foolishness  and  error ;  and  if  he  does,  he  sets  a  stum- 
bling block  in  the  way  of  the  "little  ones.  '* 

CHAPTER  IV 

Moreover  in  the  same  passage,  that  distinguished  and 
venerable  man  makes  some  reflections,  which  are  only  in 
appearance  absolute.  For  if  they  were  absolute,  they 
would  not  pertain  to  our  subject,  and  would  contribute 
nothing  to  the  argument.  If  they  concern  indulgences  at 
all,  they  must  be  understood  in  a  relative  sense.     Thus 


292  Wessel  Gansfort 

he  says:  "If  anyone  asks  anything  for  himself,  and  asks 
persistently  and  piously — in  Jesus'  name — out  of  love,  his 
prayer  will  be  effectual.  For  it  is  founded  upon  the  word, 
'If  ye  shall  ask  anything  of  the  Father  in  my  name,  He 
will  give  it  you.'"  If  we  consider  the  authority  of  these 
words  as  related  to  the  granting  of  a  papal  bull,  must  we 
not  conclude  that  it  is  better  to  depend  upon  the  Word  of 
the  Lord  than  upon  a  papal  bull? 

On  this  point,  however,  I  think  we  ought  especially  to 
consider  and  inquire  how  we  should  regard  that  name  of 
Jesus,  in  which  those  who  ask  shall  receive.  For  I  do 
not  think  that  such  a  profane  and  unworthy  idea  of  the 
Lord  Jesus,  as  was  held  by  Caiaphas  and  Annas,  would 
suffice  to  obtain  a  request  at  the  hand  of  the  Father. 
But  there  is  another  name,  righteous  and  holy,  and 
obviously  sapiential ;  and  he  that  possesses  it  knows  how 
much  he  must  suffer  for  Jesus'  sake.  We  pray  that  this 
name,  which  begets  wisdom  concerning  God  and  concern- 
ing Jesus,  may  be  hallowed.  I  inquire,  therefore,  how 
much  must  we  hallow  this  name  of  Jesus,  and  how  fervent 
and  ardent  must  our  petition  be,  if  we  are  to  obtain  all 
that  we  ask?  For  a  petition  may  be  more  or  less  ardent. 
But  granting  that  it  is  most  ardent  and  is  offered  in  the 
most  hallowed  name,  must  the  pope's  will  intervene  in 
order  to  obtain  what  is  asked?  If  it  need  not  intervene, 
then  the  above  reflection  by  Gerson  was  inserted  with  good 
reason. 

But  especially  earnest  consideration  should  be  given  to 
his  final  statement  that  the  surest  sign  of  a  salutary  in- 
dulgence is  that  it  enables  one  to  do  good  and  to  endure 
evil.  This,  therefore,  according  to  that  venerable  theo- 
logian, is  a  surer  sign  than  a  leaden  bull  following  all  the 
rules  of  the  Chancellery,  even  granting  that  the  pope, 
firm  in  his  conviction  and  in  the  plenitude  of  his  power, 
has  signed  it  with  his  own  hand.     Yet  this  sure  sign,  if 


Wessel  to  Jacob  Hoeck  293 

not  wholly  perfect,  is  not  absolutely  sure.  For  the  Pro- 
phet says,  "A  broken  and  a  contrite  heart,  O  God,  Thou 
wilt  not  despise."  Therefore,  we  should  ask,  "Contrite 
in  what  way  and  to  what  extent?"  A  heart  is  said  figur- 
atively to  be  contrite,  when  its  personal  pride  and  hard- 
ness have  been  crushed  as  between  millstones.  And  what 
are  these  two  millstones  but  those  which  this  venerable 
Doctor  mentions,  viz.  doing  the  good  that  God  enjoins 
and  enduring  the  stripes  that  He  inflicts?  These  surely 
are  the  two  millstones  crushing  the  grain  and  the  finest 
of  the  wheat,  affording  delight  to  the  kings,  the  Father, 
Son,  and  Holy  Spirit, — whom  he  thus  calls  kings  in  the 
plural,  because  they  are  more  than  one  in  person,  since 
even  the  Sacred  Canon  in  Hebrew  speaks  of  the  living 
Gods,  This  grain  of  wheat  is  broken  and  crushed  by 
perfect  contrition  into  the  smallest  particles,  so  that  it 
retains  no  self-love  whatever,  and  can  say  without  re- 
striction, "My  heart  is  prepared,  0  God,  my  heart  is 
prepared,"  i.  e.  "prepared  both  to  run  the  way  of  Thy 
commandments,  and  prepared,  O  God,  for  Thy  stripes." 
Surely  if  one  can  say  that  he  is  perfectly  prepared  for  both 
these  things,  he  will  have  that  always  sure  sign  of  indul- 
gences. But  if  he  still  retains  any  self-love,  unprepared 
and  uncrushed,  though  he  may  have  a  hundred  bulls 
furnished  with  cord  and  fold  and  all  the  keys  of  the  Chan- 
cellery or  even  with  the  iron  keys,  and  even  though  he 
may  indeed  be  truly  contrite  and  have  confessed, — so  far 
God  will  despise  him,  because  in  his  contrition  and  confes- 
sion he  is  not  absolutely  perfect. 

Therefore,  according  to  the  opinion  of  this  venerable 
man,  it  is  clear  that  papal  indulgences  are  not  so  sure  a 
sign  of  remission  as  is  the  perfect  contrition  of  a  heart 
crushed  between  the  two  millstones.  But,  by  consent  of 
the  entire  Church,  it  is  certain  that  such  contrition,  if 
perfect,  needs  no  papal  bulls;  and  if  less  than  perfect, 


294  Wessel  Gansfort 

cannot  be  made  perfect  by  the  pope.  The  papal  bull  needs 
such  contrition,  in  order  to  be  plenary;  and  if  the  contri- 
tion is  plenary,  it  does  not  need  the  papal  bull. 

These  are  my  views  concerning  the  distinguished  and 
venerable  Gerson. 

CHAPTER  V 

But  how  are  we  to  regard  the  other  authorities,  who  dis- 
agree on  indulgences  with  such  a  variety  of  opinions,  that 
it  is  almost  impossible  to  find  two  who  are  absolutely  in 
accord  with  each  other?  You,  together  with  Gerson  and 
Bonaventura,  oppose  the  Holy  Doctor  by  saying  that  in- 
dulgences will  not  necessarily  be  worth  precisely  as  much 
as  they  indicate.  Bonaventura  says  that,  in  order  to  be 
valid,  they  must  be  sustained  by  a  righteous  cause.  The 
Holy  Doctor  thinks  that  Saint  Peter's  prerogative  is  not 
safe  and  complete  unless  indulgences  are  worth  precisely 
as  much  as  is  indicated ;  otherwise  he  thinks  the  universal 
Church  cannot  be  defended  against  a  damnable  error. 
Thus  he  prefers  to  condemn  the  pope  for  the  sin  of  un- 
reasonable concession  rather  than  for  the  error  of  false 
assertion. 

You  cite  the  common  belief  against  me.  What  Car- 
thusian monk  or  what  Minorite  of  strictest  observance, 
though  absolved  in  the  last  moment  of  life  by  his  Prior 
through  a  bull  of  indulgence,  would  not  wish  prayer  to  be 
offered  for  him  after  death?  And  who  is  there  of  the 
living  who  would  not  pray  for  him?  You  reply  perhaps 
that  he  sinned  venially  after  the  absolution  secured  by  the 
indulgence.  Yet  Pope  Eugene  wished  to  exclude  such 
scrupulous  sophistry,  and  declared  that  it  was  his  authori- 
tative will  that  these  indulgences  should  be  only  for  the 
last  instant  of  life,  in  order  that  the  dying  might  depart 
forthwith  in  grace.     If  you  yourself  were  to  die,  fortified 


Wessel  to  Jacob  Hoeck  295 

by  such  indulgences, — I  demand  your  honest  confession, — 
would  you  still  wish  prayer  to  be  offered  for  you  or  not? 
Would  you  still  wish  to  pray  for  another  who  died  thus, 
or  not?  And  if  you  say,  "Certainly, "  where  then  is  that 
belief  of  yours  that  is  common  to  all?  How  great,  there- 
fore, is  this  common  belief,  which  no  truly  wise  man  com- 
pletely trusts!  Surely  the  first  proof  of  belief  is  firm 
confidence. 

CHAPTER  VI 

You  admit  that  nothing  was  written  by  the  Fathers 
concerning  indulgences  and  no  explicit  mention  of  them 
was  made  in  Scripture.  If  you  mean  that  no  positive 
mention  of  them  was  made  i.  e.  in  defense  of  the  style  and 
usual  procedure  of  indulgences  which  has  been  customary 
in  the  Church,  I  quite  agree  with  you.  But  if  you  intend 
your  statement  to  be  fully  comprehensive  with  the  idea 
that  nothing  whatever  is  found  in  Scripture  either  estab- 
lishing or  rejecting  them,  I  am  altogether  opposed  to  you. 
For  in  my  judgment,  it  was  not  the  first  pope,  Peter,  but 
the  Holy  Spirit  through  Peter,  that  put  forth  the  one  and 
only  genuine  bull  of  indulgence.  And  Peter  attests  its 
genuineness  by  stating  that  the  entrance  into  the  kingdom 
of  God  and  our  Saviour,  Jesus  Christ,  is  richly  supplied 
by  it.  He  likewise  attests  that  it  is  the  only  bull,  by  add- 
ing that  "he  that  lacketh  the  ten  things  enumerated  in 
this  passage,  is  blind,  groping  about  with  his  hands,  hav- 
ing forgotten  the  cleansing  from  his  old  sins."  Hence 
no  other  bull  is  to  be  received  or  admitted  if  it  does  not 
include  this.  All  other  bulls  are  superfluous.  It  follows, 
therefore,  that  something  is  found  in  Scripture  concerning 
indulgences,  for  this  passage  speaks  of  an  abundant  en- 
trance into  the  kingdom.  What  is  an  abundant  entrance 
into  the  kingdom  but  plenary  remission  from  punishment 


296  '  Wessel  Gansfoit 

and  from  guilt?  And  what  else  is  this  blindness,  this 
groping  about  with  one's  hands,  this  having  forgotten 
the  cleansing  from  one's  old  sin  but  exclusion  from 
the  kingdom?  According  to  my  present  conviction  this 
is  the  one  and  only  genuine  bull  of  indulgences, — this 
which  the  Apostle  Peter  puts  forth  in  the  first  chapter  of 
his  second  Canonical  epistle.  Something,  therefore,  is 
found  in  Scripture  concerning  plenary  indulgences,  al- 
though not  as  they  are  popularly  observed  to-day.  No 
successor  of  Peter  can  in  any  wise  take  from  or  add  to  the 
completeness  of  this  bull. 

CHAPTER  VII 

The  ancient  Doctors  wrote  nothing  expressly  concerning 
indulgences,  because  this  abuse  had  not  crept  in  at  the 
time  of  Augustine,  Ambrose,  Jerome,  or  Gregory.  And 
yet  "it  may  be  said"  (though  you  admit  that  you  have 
not  read  it  anywhere),  "that  Gregory  the  Great  estab- 
lished septennial  indulgences  in  connection  with  the 
stations  of  the  cross  in  Rome."  "Still  on  this  account 
you  dare  not,  you  ought  not  to  express  the  opinion  as  I 
do,"  etc.  You  say,  "on  this  account."  What,  I  ask,  do 
you  mean  by  "on  this  account"?  Is  it  because  it  is 
"commonly  said"?  Or  because  you  have  "not  read  it 
anywhere"?  You  speak  as  though  I  expressed  some 
opinion  "on  account  of"  one  or  the  other  of  these  things, 
as  a  sufficient  proof  of  it.  Now  it  would  be  altogether 
futile  to  express  something  as  one's  opinion  for  no  better 
reason  than  that  "it  is  commonly  said. "  I  must  therefore 
infer  that  I — unlike  yourself — express  this  opinion  because 
I  have  "not  read  it  anywhere,"  Yet  it  is  not  because  I 
have  nowhere  read  that  Gregory  the  Great  established 
those  septennial  indulgences  in  connection  with  the  Roman 
stations  that  I  am  expressing  this  or  any  other  opinion. 


Wessel  to  Jacob  Hoeck  297 

For  it  was  all  of  thirty-four  years  ago  that  before  the  most 
learned  men  in  Paris  I  repeatedly  expressed  this  opinion 
and  with  greater  sarcasm  perhaps  than  shrewdness  but 
not,  I  trust,  without  due  consideration.  And  again  at 
Rome,  in  the  next  to  the  last  year  of  the  pontificate  of 
Paul  II,  in  the  papal  Penitentiary,  I  expressed  the  opin- 
ion which  I  am  now  expressing  to  you,  for  which  you  are 
pleased  to  rebuke  me.  I  expressed  it  to  those  three 
theologians,  our  Masters  in  Paris,  William  of  Phalis,  John 
of  Brussels,  and  John  of  Picardy,  being  prepared  to  dis- 
cuss this  opinion  of  mine  with  them.  Of  these,  the  two 
first  were  from  the  pope's  Penitentiary,  while  I,  making 
the  fourth  person,  was  prepared  to  discuss  with  them, 
not  my  own  reasons,  but  the  Scriptures,  which  it  seemed 
to  me  related  to  my  opinion  concerning  indulgences. 
But  our  venerable  Master,  John  of  Picardy,  who  had 
recently  come  from  Paris  and  had  previously  considered 
my  arguments  with  no  little  earnestness, — as  the  other 
two  had  likewise  done, — forbade  me  to  give  expression  to 
my  opinion.  For  he  asserted  that  less  than  two  months 
before  his  arrival  among  us,  there  had  been  in  the  Sor- 
bonne  in  Paris  a  discussion  from  which  not  only  did  no 
one  come  forth  better  informed,  but  all  withdrew  more 
confused  in  mind  than  at  the  beginning.  You  may  re- 
member it.  For  I  do  not  know  but  it  was  Paul's  last  year, 
when  you  were  by  no  means  the  least  in  the  school  of 
theologians  in  Paris.  On  the  day  before,  which  was  in 
the  carnisprivium  of  the  moon,  I  had  been  invited  by 
the  pope's  chamberlain,  Henry  Dalman,  to  lunch  in  the 
Parliament  Chamber.  And  while  we  were  there.  Master 
William  of  Phalis,  whom  I  mentioned  above,  in  jest  whis- 
pered in  the  ear  of  John  of  Brussels,  "I  wish  our  Master 
Jacob  Schelwert  were  here  now."  And  both  smiled;  so 
that  the  chamberlain  inquired  the  cause  of  the  remark  and 
the  laugh.     But  when  the  former  said  it  was  due  to  my 


298  Wessel  Gansfort 

singular  opinion  concerning  indulgences,  and  I  became  not 
a  little  disturbed  at  the  situation,  the  chamberlain  took 
it  in  a  way  that  quite  comforted  me,  saying  that  this  was 
nothing  new.  More  than  that,  I  afterwards  heard  even 
members  of  the  papal  court  fully  agreeing  with  my  opin- 
ion, and  expressing  themselves  even  more  freely  than  I 
did. 

But  now  you  add  these  words,  "And  really,  (not  to 
conceal  anything  from  you),  it  was  because  I  was  horri- 
fied at  this  unheard-of  truth  that  I  at  first  ceased  to  write." 
What,  I  ask,  is  this  truth  that  so  great  a  man  as  you  never 
heard  of  ?  And  why  did  you  shudder  at  it,  if  it  is  the  truth  ? 
I  beg  you,  if  indeed  you  do  not  conceal  anything  from  me, 
not  to  conceal  this  truth  from  me,  so  that  I  too  may  hear 
and  learn  this  unheard-of  truth  from  you.  Do  not  cease 
writing  me,  at  least  on  this  point.  For  I  truly  declare  to 
you  that  I  am  undertaking  this  discussion  for  the  sake 
of  investigating  the  truth.  And  I  gladly  undertake  it, 
hoping  through  you  and  men  like  you — good  rather  than 
contentious — either  to  be  instructed  or  to  be  confirmed 
in  the  truth,  which  from  boyhood  I  have  always  sought  in 
preference  to  everything  else,  and  which  I  now  seek  more 
than  ever.  For  the  only  way  to  life  is  through  the  truth. 
Moreover,  I  shall  rejoice — not  less  but  more — at  being 
vanquished  rather  than  victorious,  since  it  is  my  progress 
rather  than  anyone  else's  that  I  desire,  or  ought  to  desire. 

Hence  I  am  not  a  little  surprised  that  a  wise  man  like 
yourself  should  judge  me  capable  of  making  assertions 
hastily  and  thoughtlessly,  and  should  think  that  I  am 
influenced  solely  by  this  one  negative  statement,  viz. 
that  nothing  is  contained  in  Scripture  concerning  indul- 
gences. I  know,  of  course,  that  the  Sacred  Scripture 
alone  is  not  an  adequate  rule  of  faith.  I  know  that  certain 
things,  which  were  not  written,  were  handed  down  to  us 
through  the  apostles;  and  that  all  these  traditions  are  to 


Wessel  to  Jacob  Hoeck  299 

be  accepted  like  Canonical  Scripture  in  the  rule  of  faith. 
These  two  things  alone  and  whatever  by  common  consent 
has  been  evidently  deduced  from  them  as  a  necessary 
consequence  constitute  the  only  rule  of  faith.  And  I 
recognize  this  to  be  the  only  rule  of  faith  from  which  no 
one  can  deviate  without  loss  of  salvation.  Nevertheless 
there  are  many  things  outside  of  it,  which  must  be  faith- 
fully believed, — that  is,  must  not  be  rejected, — because 
of  the  piety  which  they  evidently  foster. 

The  usual  teaching  of  the  Church  concerning  sacra- 
mental confession,  viz.  that  it  was  handed  down  to  the 
Church  by  Christ  through  the  apostles,  is  quite  acceptable 
to  you.  I  believe  that  this  opinion  of  yours  is  right,  since 
indeed  it  is  confirmed  by  the  general  statements  of  John 
in  his  canonic  writings  and  by  the  more  specific  words  of 
James.  Therefore,  I  admit  that  in  this  rule  of  faith  I 
ought  to  depend  on  the  authority  of  the  Church,  with 
which — not  in  which — I  believe.  I  believe,  however,  in 
the  Holy  Spirit  regulating  the  rule  of  faith  and  speaking 
through  the  apostles  and  prophets.  I  believe  with  the 
Holy  Church,  I  believe  in  accordance  with  the  Holy 
Church,  but  I  do  not  believe  in  the  Church,  because  be- 
lieving is  an  act  of  latria,  a  sacrifice  of  theological  virtue 
to  be  offered  to  God  alone. 

And  farther  on  you  add  that  some  of  our  own  number 
think  that  indulgences  are  likewise  of  the  rule  of  faith. 
Who,  I  ask,  are  these?  I  admit  that  the  venerable  An- 
toninus, Bishop  of  Florence,  a  man  possessed  of  such  un- 
usual nobility  of  character  in  life  that  to-day  the  tomb  in 
which  he  rests  is  adorned  with  much  wax,  holds  that  it  is 
heresy  to  maintain  any  opinion  against  the  system  of 
indulgences.  But  is  Gerson  who  so  forcibly  and  funda- 
mentally branded  the  present  system  on  this  account  a 
heretic?  I  see  "whither  these  things  tend."  For  if  the 
men,  to  whom  you  allude,  speak  the  truth,  then  everyone 


300  Wessel  Gansfort 

that  opposes  them  would  strike  against  the  rule  of  faith, 
because  he  would  be  opposed  to  the  traditions  of  the 
apostles ;  and  if  he  stubbornly  persists  he  must  be  a  here- 
tic. But  how,  I  ask,  will  these  men  of  our  own  number 
establish — I  cannot  but  speak  of  this  falsehood  with  some 
warmth — this  error  of  theirs?  Was  anything  regarding 
it  handed  down  by  the  gospel  or  by  the  customs  of  the 
apostles?  Has  anything  been  confirmed  by  an  observ- 
ance throughout  the  years  since  the  apostles'  time  or 
by  some  continuous  custom?  That  most  zealous  man 
mentioned  above,  the  annalist  Antoninus,  who  very 
strongly  favored  the  aforesaid  opinion,  clearly  admitted 
that  he  had  not  yet  discovered  when  indulgences  be- 
gan. Nevertheless  as  if  some  stronger  authority  were 
needed  to  convince  the  Legalists  and  Canonists,  he  him- 
self,— though  a  theologian,  Doctor,  and  bishop, — affirms 
that  John,  associated  with  Andrew,  left  some  writings  con- 
cerning indulgences,  that  certain  other  Doctors  mention 
them,  and  that  Boniface  VIII  by  the  advice  of  the  cardi- 
nals first  formally  established  them.  A  worthy  authority 
indeed,  that  it  should  be  corroborated  by  the  sanctity  of 
so  great  a  man!  That  famous  Boniface  did  three  grand 
things :  he  persuaded  Celestine  to  give  up  the  Apostolate ; 
he  asserted  that  the  pope  was  lord  of  all;  he  established 
indulgences.  "He  entered  like  a  fox,  reigned  like  a  lion, 
died  like  a  dog. "  Antoninus  also  said  that  Boniface  was 
of  the  opinion  that  plenary  indulgences  would  last  from 
centenary  to  centenary;  that  he  assigned  only  three 
churches  to  be  visited,  the  Lateran,  St.  Peter's,  and  the 
church  of  St.  Maria  Major.  And  this  he  did  about  the 
year  of  our  Lord  1300.  That  being  so,  where  during 
these  1300  years  and  why  did  that  apostolic  tradition 
slumber,  especially  if  it  is  so  apostolic  that  it  ought  to  be 
reckoned  as  strictly  accepted  in  the  rule  of  faith  ?  I  do  not 
think  that  anything  that  was  settled  by  Boniface  VIII  or 


Wessel  to  Jacob  Hoeck  301 

Clement  after  him,  or  Gregory,  ought  to  be  considered  in 
the  rule  of  faith.  The  venerable  Gerson  said  enough  on 
this  point.  The  very  reverend  Antoninus  openly  admits 
that  Clement's  numerous  bulls  deviated  so  far  from  the 
rule  of  faith,  that  he  did  not  believe  they  were  buUated. 
Yet  those  very  leaden  bulls  are  still  preserved  in  the  treas- 
ury of  privileges  in  Vienne,  Limoges,  and  Poitiers. 

And  you  add  that  you  "heartily  oppose  me  on  this  point 
as  the  foundation  and  basis"  of  our  discussion.  What,  I 
ask,  is  this  foundation  and  basis  that  is  so  solid?  Is  it 
that  the  present  course  of  indulgences,  beginning  with  the 
instruction  handed  down  by  Christ's  apostles,  has  come 
down  to  us  through  the  continuous  observance  of  it  by 
the  Fathers.  You  have  made  this  the  premise  of  your 
next  conclusion.  I  suspect  therefore  that  this  is  the 
foundation  and  basis  on  which  you  heartily  oppose  me. 
Or  if  you  have  anything  else  for  a  foundation  and  basis, 
declare  it  as  the  motive  for  your  firm  belief  and  assertion 
that  the  pope  can  decree  plenary  indulgence. 

CHAPTER  VIII 

"This  you  firmly  believe";  and  yet  "you  are  not  so 
foolish  as  to  agree  with  most  persons  in  thinking  that 
whatever  the  pope  decides  in  such  matters  shall  stand 
unshaken."  You  "firmly  believe  and  assert  that  the 
pope  can  decree  a  plenary  indulgence."  And  yet  "if 
most  persons  agree  in  thinking  that  whatever  the  pope 
decides  in  such  matters  shall  stand  unshaken,"  in  your 
judgment  they  are  foolish.  Both  of  these  are  your  own 
statements ;  if  the  pope  decrees  a  plenary  indulgence,  you 
firmly  believe  and  assert  it.  And  if  you  agree  with  what- 
ever the  pope  decides  in  such  matters,  you  are  foolish; 
unless  perhaps  he  decides  something  outside  of  or  above 
this  plenary  indulgence.     I  do  not  see  how  you  will  square 


302  Wessel  Gansfort 

these  wavering  words,  so  that  they  will  go  together.  Such 
wavering  words  are  not  suited  to  your  most  consistent 
mind.  You  know  our  Nominalist  school  will  not  permit 
such  inconsistency  and  incoherence  in  words.  If  you  are 
not  foolish  like  most  persons,  because  you  do  not  think 
whatever  the  pope  decides  in  such  matters  will  stand  un- 
shaken, then  you  will  not  be  foolish,  because  you  do  not 
think  that  a  plenary  indulgence,  upon  which  he  shall  de- 
cide, will  stand  unshaken. 

And  as  though  giving  a  reason  you  add,  "even  if  the 
pope  is  deranged."  Now  if  you  did  not  add  this  as  a 
reason,  there  would  be  no  point  in  adding  it.  But  if, 
as  I  judge,  you  do  add  it  as  a  reason,  then  you  agree  with 
me  in  thinking  it  reasonable  that  the  pope  may  be  deranged 
in  such  matters.  But  I  ask  you  how  he  can  be  deranged 
in  such  matters  unless  he  deviates  from  the  rule  of  faith 
through  ignorance,  perfidy,  or  malice.  Surely  if  he  grants 
useless  and  questionable  indulgences  from  any  one  of  these 
motives,  he  must  be  deranged. 

You,  therefore,  cautiously  take  refuge  behind  a  con- 
dition as  though  behind  an  impregnable  wall,  declaring 
that  only  that  will  stand  unshaken  which  the  pope  in 
matters  of  this  sort  shall  decide,  ''if  his  key  is  not  in  error 
and  Christ  does  not  reject  it. "  What,  I  ask,  is  the  mean- 
ing of  this  indispensable  condition,  "if  his  key  is  not  in 
error"?  What  is  this  key  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven? 
And  what  is  the  error  of  this  key?  You  are  obviously 
assuming  a  key  that  may  err  and  at  the  same  time  be  the 
effectual  and  lawful  key  of  the  kingdom,  the  key  of  the 
kingdom  of  heaven.  0  dreadful  kingdom,  if  its  gates, 
bars,  bolts,  and  keys  are  such  that  through  them  error, 
falsehood,  and  ignorance  can  creep  stealthily  within ! 

The  key,  as  Augustine  explains,  is  love  diffused  through 
the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  hearts  of  the  children  of  the  kingdom. 
The  Lord  Jesus  before  his  resurrection  promised  these  two 


Wessel  to  Jacob  Hoeck  303 

keys  to  Peter  when  he  said :  "I  will  give  unto  thee  the  keys 
of  the  kingdom  of  heaven ;  and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  bind 
on  earth  shall  be  bound  in  heaven;  and  whatsoever  thou 
shalt  loose  on  earth  shall  be  loosed  in  heaven. "  In  like 
manner  be  presented  these  keys  after  the  resurrection — 
not  to  one — but  to  all  unitedly,  when  he  breathed  on 
them,  saying,  "Receive  ye  the  Holy  Spirit;  whose  soever 
sins  ye  forgive,  they  are  forgiven  unto  them ;  whose  soever 
sins  ye  retain,  they  are  retained. " 

These  two  keys,  in  Augustine's  opinion,  are  never  re- 
jected by  Christ,  nor  does  it  ever  happen  that  they  are  in 
error.  For  he  defines  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  as  being: 
(i)  love  diffused  through  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  hearts  of 
the  children  of  God,  and  (2)  the  Holy  Spirit.  And  he 
says  that  to  loose  and  to  bind  is  to  receive  into  fellowship 
because  of  the  similitude  of  love  or  to  exclude  from  fellow- 
ship because  of  its  dissimilitude.  And  since  to  receive 
into  the  fellowship  of  similitude  belongs  to  godliness  rather 
than  to  authority,  therefore  not  one  among  all  the  saints 
is  prevented  either  by  sex  or  condition  from  binding  and 
loosing;  nor  is  this  binding  ever  rejected  by  Christ,  since 
it  never  happens  that  it  is  in  error. 

If  however  you  mean  that  the  key  is  in  error  when  he 
to  whom  the  keys  have  been  entrusted  is  in  error,  I  do  not 
dispute  that.  For  I  cling  unswervingly  to  Augustine's 
opinion  as  expressed  above,  in  which  there  is  no  fear  of 
ambiguity  arising  from  any  wavering  words.  Nay,  I  en- 
tirely agree  with  your  opinion,  providing  it  be  first  ad- 
mitted that  even  the  most  holy  Pope  Peter  greatly  erred, 
in  order  that  the  Church  thereafter  might  know  that  it 
was  not  bound  by  the  conclusions  of  high  pontiffs,  but 
that  in  case  of  disagreement  every  believer  should  be 
bound  by  the  example  of  St.  Paul — in  defense  of  the  faith 
■ — to  resist  the  pope  to  his  face  and,  if  necessary,  in  the 
presence  of  all. 


304  Wessel  Gansfort 

You  cite  the  word  of  that  venerable  man,  Thomas  de 
Cursellis,  who  is  of  the  opinion  that  the  statement  made 
to  Peter  was,  "whatsoever  thou  shalt  loose,"  not,  "what- 
soever thou  shalt  say."  And  you  did  well  to  cite  his 
opinion,  which  is  in  the  interest  of  truth;  nevertheless,  it 
does  not  make  the  matter  sufficiently  clear.  For  in  order 
that  Christ's  word  might  become  perfectly  clear  and  in- 
dubitable there  ought  to  have  been  a  further  statement  as 
to  how  and  by  what  means  Peter  could  bind  and  loose. 
I  therefore  interpret  the  word  thus :  If  a  minister  of  Christ 
administers  the  word  of  faith  or  the  sacrament  of  faith  or 
the  example  of  love  in  accordance  with  the  teaching  of 
Christ  and  the  gospel,  both  those  under  his  authority  and 
those  who  hear  him  should  faithfully  believe  that  through 
his  ministry  of  faith  and  piety  he  truly  does  loose  and  bind 
on  earth  what  is  loosed  and  bound  in  heaven;  and  if  he 
attempts  to  loose  or  bind  in  any  other  way,  what  he  does 
is  of  no  avail.  I  think  Peter  and  his  successors  were 
promised  nothing  but  the  salutary  ministry  of  piety.  And 
I  shall  hold  to  this,  until  a  sounder  doctrine  is  propounded 
to  me  by  you  or  by  others. 

I  am  not  a  little  horrified  at  your  admonition  that  the 
pope's  authority  ought  to  have  more  weight  with  me  than 
reason.  Did  the  theological  faculty  at  Paris  regard  the 
authority  of  Pope  Clement  of  greater  weight  than  reason 
— or  even  of  any  value  whatever  compared  to  reason — 
when  they  rebuked  and  corrected  him  for  his  temerity  in 
laying  commands  upon  angels ;  in  responding  to  the  votive 
gifts  and  wishes  of  those  who  had  taken  the  cross  by  grant- 
ing them  the  release  of  three  or  four  souls  from  purgatory; 
and  also  in  issuing  indulgences  remitting  punishment  and 
guilt?  Nevertheless  leaden  bulls  authorizing  these  errors 
are  found  to-day.  Yet  you  admonish  me  in  matters  of 
this  sort  to  regard  the  authority  of  the  pope,  not  merely  as 
a  substitute  for  reason,  but  as  superior  to  it!    What,  I 


Wessel  to  Jacob  Hoeck  305 

ask,  am  I  to  regard  as  reason  in  these  matters?  Is  it  not 
the  Holy  Scriptures?  Do  you  wish  to  put  the  authority 
of  the  pope  above  the  Holy  Scriptures?  The  will  of  the 
pope  and  the  authority  of  Scripture  have  not  been  placed 
on  an  equal  footing,  since  the  will  of  the  pope  must  be 
regulated  in  accordance  with  the  truth  of  the  Scriptures, 
not  the  truth  in  accordance  with  the  will  of  the  pope. 
But  to  this  foundation  for  your  admonition  as  though  it 
were  insufficient,  you  add  the  authority  of  the  prelates. 
And  lest  anything  should  be  lacking  at  the  top,  you  further 
add  that  of  the  Doctors.  To  cite  the  authority  of  the 
prelates,  in  my  opinion,  merely  begs  the  question. 

As  for  the  Doctors,  they — though  not  all  of  them — are 
of  the  opinion  that  indulgences  should  be  granted  only  so 
far  as  they  make  for  piety.  And  in  this  opinion  some  of 
them  speak  rather  mildly,  if  it  be  granted  that  in  many 
things  they — like  yourself — disapprove  of  the  Church's 
forms  and  abuses.  For  they  say  that  the  granting  of 
indulgences — to  whatever  extent — is  a  question  that  ought 
not  to  be  regarded  lightly  but  to  be  considered  in  the  faith, 
hope,  and  love  of  Christ.  I  too  think  it  ought  not  to  be 
lightly  regarded,  for  I  sincerely  prize  the  gifts  of  the  keys 
to  the  Church  in  faith,  hope,  and  the  love  of  Christ. 

CHAPTER  IX 

Further,  the  statement  of  Augustine  which  you  quote 
concerning  the  gospel  and  the  Church  does  not  prove  more 
than  it  contains.  It  is  a  statement  with  regard  to  the 
beginning  (of  faith),  which  does  not  imply  any  comparison. 
"I  would  not  believe  the  gospel,  if  I  had  not  believed  the 
Church."  Just  as  each  one  of  that  first  multitude  of 
believers  might  well  have  said,  "I  would  not  believe  the 
gospel,  if  I  had  not  believed  Peter."  So  in  my  own  case 
to-day,  if  I  had  not  first  as  a  little  boy  believedthe  members 

VOL.  1—30 


3o6  Wessel  Gansfort 

of  my  household,  and  afterwards  my  teachers  in  school, 
and  finally  the  clergy,  I  would  not  believe  the  gospel  to-day. 
Nevertheless  I  believe  the  gospel  more  than  any  number 
of  mortal  men,  just  as  I  ought  to  do.  Nay,  even  if  I  felt 
that  all  men  disbelieved  it,  notwithstanding,  I  would  still 
cling  to  the  gospel  rather  than  to  them.  In  his  statement, 
therefore,  Augustine  implied  the  beginning  of  a  still  small 
and  infant  faith.  He  does  not  compare  the  authority  of 
the  Church  with  the  worth  of  the  gospel. 

That  very  many  of  the  chapters  of  the  body  of  the  law 
speak  of  indulgences,  I  admit  and  regard  as  certain.  For 
I  know  that  the  use  of  indulgences  existed  in  the  Church 
before  the  time  of  John  XXII.  And  I  do  not  deny  that 
thereafter  it  was  inserted  in  the  Decretals.  But  I  do  not 
agree  that  I  am  bound  to  believe  in  indulgences  on  that 
account. 

With  regard  to  the  moderation  of  the  venerable  Gerson, 
the  reply  that  in  my  judgment  ought  to  be  made  can  be 
gathered  in  some  measure  from  the  foregoing  statements. 
Christ  gave  distinct  authority  concerning  the  remission 
of  sins ;  he  made  no  mention  of  any  authority  for  the  remis- 
sion of  punishments.  However,  setting  aside  the  question 
as  to  how  authority  for  the  remission  of  sins  is  to  be  inter- 
preted, it  may  be  granted  that  the  belief  in  loosing  sins  is 
to-day  quite  general.  Now  Gerson  is  clearly  of  the  opinion 
that  in  the  remission  of  sins  the  bestowment  of  grace  neces- 
sarily precedes  the  remission  of  guilt,  because  the  remis- 
sion of  guilt  is  nothing  else  than  the  bestowment  of  grace. 
"Her  sins  which  were  many  were  forgiven,  because  she 
loved  much."  And  according  to  him,  the  remission  of 
everlasting  punishment  precedes  resurrection  from  sin. 
In  so  far  then  as  the  minister  of  Christ  cooperates  with 
Christ  toward  these  three  ends,  in  so  far  he  binds  and  looses 
solely  in  his  ministry ;  for  of  course  he  concurs  with  him  in 
word  or  ministry.     But  in  ministering,  neither  the  person 


Wessel  to  Jacob  Hoeck  307 

who  looses  nor  the  person  who  is  loosed  can  know  with 
what  gifts  enjoined  by  God  in  binding  or  loosing  the  former 
concurs.  Nor  does  he  possess  any  power  or  efficacy  in 
himself  in  regard  to  these  gifts.  And  if  this  opinion  of 
mine  observes  and  upholds  the  words  of  the  Lord,  what 
need  is  there  of  bestowing  further  authority  upon  the  pre- 
lates? For  if  anyone  does  bestow  such  authority  upon 
them,  on  what  ground  will  he  do  so  without  finding  it 
necessary  to  speak  hesitatingly  or  falteringly  in  defense 
of  it? 

With  reference  to  the  ministrations  of  office  as  possessing 
sacramental  effect,  no  one  doubts  that  the  effect  follows 
if  the  recipient  interposes  no  obstacle.  That,  however,  is 
not  the  case  in  jurisdictional  offices.  And  it  is  in  order  to 
remove  this  very  restriction  that  most  persons  so  extend 
jurisdictional  authority  as  to  include  judicial  power  over 
the  inner  man, — which  is  perhaps  going  farther  than  they 
should. 

As  regards  punishments,  until  I  am  better  informed,  I 
simply  hold  that  the  punishment  is  remitted  together  with 
the  remission  of  sin,  and  that  no  one  who  is  altogether  free 
from  a  sin  is  thereafter  liable  to  punishment.  For  the 
fact  that  cleansing  is  imposed  is  due  to  imperfect  grace, 
and  that  with  it  certain  venial  sins  still  remain.  But  as 
these  sins  are  not  deadly,  their  punishment  is  merely 
temporal.  If  these  points  were  asserted  merely  on  the 
ground  that  they  were  reasonable,  they  would  influence 
those  who  exert  their  intellect  but  moderately.  Consider, 
for  example,  the  word  of  the  Prophet,  "Blessed  are  they 
whose  transgressions  are  forgiven,  whose  sins  are  covered, 
and  unto  whom  the  Lord  imputeth  not  iniquity. "  But  we 
have  still  clearer  testimony  concerning  punishments,  viz. 
that  of  John  in  his  canonical  epistle,  "Perfect  love  casteth 
out  fear,  because  fear  hath  punishment."  This  then  is 
the  consequent  deduced  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  through  that 


3o8  Wessel  Gansfort 

disciple  whom  Jesus  loved,  "Fear  hath  punishment; 
therefore  there  is  no  fear  in  perfect  love. "  In  accordance 
with  this  form  of  proof,  I  affirm  the  opposite  proposition, 
"Those  who  need  to  be  cleansed  in  purgatory  have  pun- 
ishment and  fear;  hence  they  are  not  perfect  in  love.  " 

I  think  the  venerable  Gerson  was  also  of  this  opinion. 
For  I  know  it  was  his  understanding  that  the  universal 
authority  of  the  apostolic  see  ought  to  be  regulated  by  and 
be  regarded  as  depending  on  the  truth  of  the  Canonical 
Scriptures;  and  by  no  means  that  the  truth  of  the  Scrip- 
ture depends  on  the  will  or  authority  of  the  pope,  even  if 
he  is  not  deranged  or  mistaken.  Therefore  if  that  ven- 
erable man  afterwards — or  even  in  this  statement  con- 
cerning indulgences — says  something  that  is  considerably 
milder  than  what  accords  with  the  plain,  theological  truth, 
I  think  he  is  silently  making  a  concession  in  the  interest  of 
piety,  in  order  that  the  truth  may  not  beget  a  stumbling 
block  to  the  "little  ones"  through  the  malice  of  certain 
men.  You  know  how  kindly  and  complaisant  and  good 
he  is,  and  how  often  he  abandons  his  own  opinion  when 
others  disagree  with  him.  Nevertheless  in  this  it  seems 
very  strange  that  this  judgment  is  so  far  removed  from 
what  is  true  and  right.  Take,  for  example,  the  letter  ad- 
vising what  and  how  one  ought  to  desire,  in  which  he 
warns  men  to  shun  logical  exactnesses,  with  their  mani- 
fold distinctions.  Yet  most  of  these  are  necessary  for 
scholastic  exercise.  For  who  could  ever  attain  to  that 
apex  of  theology,  to  which  Peter  D'Ailly  climbs,  without 
definitions,  divisions,  argumentations,  distinctions,  and 
logical  instances?  I  am  speaking  of  disputations,  where 
there  is  need  of  the  sharp  tooth  of  discussion;  not  of  ser- 
mons to  the  people,  nor  of  meditation  Godward.  How 
could  Peter  have  shattered  John  of  Montesono  upon  the 
wheel  of  the  error  of  those  famous  fourteen  conclusions,  if 
he  had  not  shown  him  his  delusion  by  manifold  distinctions 


Wessel  to  Jacob  Hoeck  309 

or  by  antecedent  or  consequent  ignorance  of  syllogistic 
refutations?    Theologians  must  have  recourse  to  logic. 

And  pray  how  could  Gerson  himself  have  become  so 
great  a  theologian  without  the  aid  of  the  most  accurate 
logic  of  his  Master  Peter?  For  the  latter  did  not  merely 
convict  John  of  Montesono,  at  whose  condemnation  Ger- 
son himself  was  present  and  which  he  asserts  was  just; 
but  the  entire  order  of  preachers  from  the  University  of 
Paris  was  cut  off  for  fourteen  years,  because  their  bachelors 
in  a  certain  zeal  for  the  teaching  of  St.  Thomas  were  un- 
willing to  abjure  the  errors  they  were  spreading.  Gerson 
himself  in  the  third  part  of  the  treatise  he  published  against 
John  of  Montesono  clearly  states  that  this  teaching  was  so 
thoroughly  disapproved  that  it  had  no  influence  whatever 
in  preventing  the  just  condemnation  of  the  Doctor  of 
Montesono. 

I  think,  therefore,  that  Gerson  in  his  zeal  for  piety  and 
edification,  knowing  by  experience  what  widespread  scan- 
dal arose  throughout  the  Church  of  God  from  the  obstin- 
ate contentions  of  the  Scholastics,  preferred  to  maintain 
a  perversion  of  truth  among  the  "little  ones"  rather  than 
cause  a  schism  or  any  stumbling  block  to  love  in  the 
Church.  And  therefore  his  milder  statements  must  be 
interpreted  in  the  light  of  this  purpose ;  just  as  we  see  the 
wisdom  of  a  shipwrecked  man  in  throwing  his  precious 
wares  overboard  in  a  storm,  in  order  that  he  may  save  his 
life.  In  so  doing  he  is  evidently  led  by  nature,  since  we 
do  not  at  any  rate  suffer  both  evils,  when  we  undergo  the 
lesser  in  order  to  avoid  the  greater.  Hence  also  I  some- 
times blame  myself  to-day,  as  I  used  to  more  often  at  Paris, 
for  discussing  this  subject  at  all  with  those  who  are  not 
fitted  for  it,  and  I  only  hope  that  at  any  rate  it  did  no 
harm.  I  often  consider  you  and  those  persons  to  be  happy, 
who  possess  a  more  complaisant  moderation  in  such  ques- 
tions.    I  suppose  you  have  read  Gerson's  opinion  in  his 


310  Wessel  Gansfort 

statement  before  Peter  of  Luna,  as  to  how  a  common  error 
sometimes  results  in  the  right.  He  says  that  during  the 
prevalence  of  an  error  a  wise  man  is  bound  either  to  do  or 
to  omit  doing  many  things,  which  are  of  such  nature 
that,  if  he  should  do  or  neglect  them  when  the  error  ceases, 
he  would  be  seriously  at  fault. 

I  think,  therefore,  that  the  prudent  Gerson,  after  opening 
the  eyes  of  careful  readers  by  propositions  which  contain 
undoubted  truth,  purposely  relaxed  his  strictness  some- 
what on  account  of  contentious  men,  and  was  silent  re- 
specting the  exact  truth  hidden  within,  for  the  sake  of 
those  who  were  slower  of  apprehension.  Indeed,  how  shall 
we  otherwise  reconcile  the  great  discrepancies  we  find  in 
the  opinions  of  this  venerable  man  ?  For  certain  of  these 
opinions  so  clearly  support  me,  that  I  think  of  basing  my 
premise  upon  them.  Yet  sometimes  he  agrees  with  you. 
Indeed  in  statements  intended  for  the  people  he  expresses 
certain  opinions  so  mildly  and  gently  that  you  can  build 
on  them  in  opposing  me.  Nor  is  this  without  value.  For 
I  think  that  you,  after  experiencing  a  storm  just  as  he  did, 
cite  him  in  the  same  spirit  of  zeal  for  piety  that  he  dis- 
played in  his  writings.  And  if  you  act,  teach,  and  preach 
in  that  spirit,  I  praise  your  wisdom. 

CHAPTER  X 

I  fully  agree  that  in  sacramental  confession  an  attrlte 
person  is  sometimes  made  contrite  through  penance,  viz. 
when,  by  confession  without  interposing  an  obstacle  to 
the  sacramental  covenant,  he  receives  the  promised  grace 
of  life.  And  he  would  not  live  by  grace  unless  he  received 
love  in  some  degree.  Indeed,  without  love  he  could 
neither  live,  nor  could  he  be  at  all  contrite  or  humble. 
For  he  who  is  not  prepared  to  be  ground  to  some  extent 
between  those  two  millstones  is  not  yet  humbled  and 


Wessel  to  Jacob  Hoeck  311 

contrite.  But  the  stubborn  hardness  of  his  heart  still 
causes  him  to  be  despised  in  God's  sight.  If,  however,  he 
is  perfectly  contrite,  he  will  not  be  bound  to  suffer  punish- 
ment through  the  Church. 

You  remember,  I  am  sure,  those  widely  published  words 
from  Book  IV  of  the  Sentences,  Distinct,  18,  "Others  in- 
deed say  that  it  is  God  alone,  and  no  priest,  that  pays  the 
debt  of  everlasting  death,  just  as  he  also — of  and  through 
himself — quickens  the  soul  within. "  For,  even  as  he — of 
and  through  himself  alone — quickens  the  soul,  so  he — of 
and  through  himself — covers  the  sins  of  the  penitent. 
Because,  just  as  he  retained  for  himself  the  authority  of 
baptism,  so  he  retained  that  of  penance. 

But  it  is  clearly  admitted  by  all  that  in  the  remission  of 
sins  the  priest  has  no  part  at  all  except  in  the  administra- 
tion of  the  sacrament.  So  in  the  sacrament  of  penance, 
the  Lord  operates  in  secret  through  the  sacrament  in 
accordance  with  the  disposition  of  the  recipient.  For 
he — of  and  through  himself — covers  his  sins,  when  in 
bestowing  love  he  does  not  reserve  him  for  punishment. 
And  it  is  then  that  he  pays  the  debt  of  punishment.  For 
"love  covereth  a  multitude  of  sins."  And  according  to 
Augustine  they  are  covered,  when  they  are  abolished 
through  love.  Hence  he  says:  "For  if  God  covereth  the 
sins,  he  did  not  wish  to  notice  them.  And  if  he  did  not 
wish  to  notice  them,  he  did  not  wish  to  consider  them; 
and  if  he  did  not  wish  to  consider  them,  he  did  not  wish 
to  punish  them,  but  rather  wished  to  pardon  them." 
Again  at  the  end  of  the  chapter  he  draws  this  conclusion : 
"Hence  it  is  clearly  shown  that  God  himself  plainly  re- 
leases the  penitent  from  the  debt  of  punishment.  And 
this  he  does  at  the  time  when  he  illumines  him  from  within 
by  inspiring  him  with  true  and  heartfelt  contrition." 
Further  in  the  Rubric  he  says  that  this  is  "a  more  correct 
opinion  than  that "  mentioned  in  the  preceding  chapter,  viz. 


312  Wessel  Gansfort 

that  * '  certain  persons  believe  that  the  guilt  is  removed  by 
God,  but  that  the  punishment  is  removed  by  the  priest. " 
In  the  eighth  chapter  he  cites  Ambrose  to  the  same 
purport,  saying,  "The  priest  indeed  performs  his  office, 
but  he  does  not  exercise  the  right  of  any  authority." 
And  again,  "He  only  forgives  sins,  who  alone  died  for 
sin."  Likewise  Augustine,  "No  one  takes  away  sins 
except  the  Lamb  of  God,  who  alone  taketh  away  the  sins 
of  the  world. "  But  how  does  he  take  away  sins  except 
by  forgiving  the  debts?  How  does  he  forgive  the  debts 
except  by  a  gift  whereby  we  can  fulfil  the  whole  law,  so 
that  not  one  jot  or  tittle  is  lacking?  For  he  forgives  our 
past  sins,  who  also  preserves  us  from  present  sin  and  saves 
us  from  the  sin  that  threatens  us.  But  the  two  last,  viz., 
present  and  future  sins — both  with  respect  to  their  punish- 
ment and  guilt — are  taken  away  only  by  the  Lamb  of  God. 
And  that  these  words  of  Augustine  are  not  opposed  to 
the  words  of  the  Lord,  "Whatsoever  ye  shall  bind"  etc., 
is  logically  shown  by  Magister  in  the  words  of  Augustine. 
These  words  are  to  be  understood  as  meaning  that  the 
Church's  love,  inspired  by  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  hearts  of 
those  who  share  in  love  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  forgives  their 
sins,  while  it  retains  the  sins  of  those  who  do  not  share  in 
them.  And  in  the  same  chapter  it  is  expressly  stated  that 
according  to  Augustine  these  distinctions  conform  to  the 
meaning,  "Not  whomsoever  ye  shall  wish  to  bind  or 
think  of  binding,  but  those  on  whom  ye  exert  the  true 
operation  of  righteousness  and  mercy. "  And  in  no  other 
sense  do  I  recognize  your  work  upon  sinners.  Then  he 
adds:  "The  Holy  Spirit  which  has  been  given  to  all  the 
saints  who  are  united  in  love,  whether  known  in  the  body 
or  not,  forgives  sins.  In  like  manner  when  anyone's  sins 
are  retained,  they  are,  retained  by  these  same  saints,  from 
whom — whether  unknown  in  the  body  or  not — he  is 
separated  by  the  perverseness  of  his  heart. " 


Wessel  to  Jacob  Hoeck  313 

In  accordance  with  this  opinion  of  Augustine,  which  is 
in  agreement  with  the  former  statement,  to  loose  and  to 
retain  sins  is  principally  the  work  of  God  alone.  Yet 
through  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  principally  forgives 
and  retains  sins,  the  Church  participates  in  it.  And  he 
adds:  "Therefore  sins  are  forgiven  through  the  Church, 
when  anyone  joins  the  Church  of  the  saints;  and  sins  are 
retained  through  the  Church,  when  anyone  forfeits  the 
love  of  the  Church,  being  united  to  it  or  excluded  from  it 
by  the  Spirit  of  God  which  was  given  to  the  Church, 
through  whom  order  and  administration  and  government 
are  maintained  in  the  Church. "  For  in  so  far  as  they  co- 
operate with  the  Spirit  in  his  share  of  the  work,  in  so  far 
they  bind  and  loose  on  earth ;  and  in  so  far  it  is  bound  and 
loosed  in  heaven. 

So  also  the  brother  of  the  Lord  in  exalted  and  sublime 
words  says,  "He  who  converteth  a  sinner  from  the  error  of 
his  way  shall  save  a  soul  from  death  and  shall  cover  a 
multitude  of  sins. "  Yet  how  shall  he  convert  him  from 
the  error  of  his  former  way,  except  through  the  wisdom 
that  comes  to  one  who  walks  in  the  right  ways  of  God? 
But  does  this  wisdom,  rectitude,  and  walking  originate 
primarily  with  the  brother  who  converts  the  sinner?  And 
must  it  therefore  be  said  that  he  is  absolutely  the  saviour 
of  him  whom  he  has  recalled  from  his  error?  Has  he 
covered  him  with  the  wide  mantle  of  love,  which  will  thus 
hide  a  multitude  of  sins?  If  so,  every  ordinary  man, 
without  possessing  any  ministerial  right  of  rank  or  juris- 
diction, solely  because  of  his  kindliness  and  complaisance 
and  goodness,  can  recall  another  brother  from  error.  And 
he  who  is  recalled  from  error  can  glow  with  such  love  that 
truly  many  sins  and  many  punishments  will  be  remitted 
unto  him.  Must  the  remission  of  punishments  and  sins 
therefore  be  assigned  to  authority  rather  than  to  love? 
And  can  the  blameless  man  understand  the  rectitude  of  the 


314  Wessel  Gansfort 

ways  of  God  rather  than  he  who  converts  one  from  the 
error  of  his  former  way?  Is  therefore  that  conversion 
more  important  ?  But  I  return  to  Magister,  who — in  the 
same  "Distinction"  under  the  heading,  "they  also  bind,  " 
— clearly  holds  that  "the  authority  of  priests  is  confined 
to  ministering  in  the  sight  of  the  Church,  just  as  the  lawful 
priest  did  in  leprosy,  which  he  could  neither  sprinkle  nor 
take  away."  And  concerning  this  he  cites  St.  Jerome's 
words,  "Certain  persons,  not  understanding  this  point, 
infer  from  the  arrogance  of  the  Pharisees  that  priests  can 
either  condemn  the  innocent  or  forgive  the  guilty,  although 
with  God  the  question  is  not  the  opinion  of  the  priests,  but 
the  life  of  the  accused.  "  And  Magister  adds,  "Here  it  is 
clearly  shown  that  God  does  not  follow  the  judgment  of 
the  Church." 

CHAPTER  XI 

On  the  other  hand  it  is  your  opinion  concerning  indul- 
gences that,  whenever  an  attrite  person  is  made  contrite 
by  sacramental  confession,  the  eternal  punishment  due  to 
him  is  divinely  changed  to  a  temporal  one.  And  so  long 
as  this  is  not  computed  by  the  official  act  of  the  priest,  it 
remains  a  matter  before  the  bar  of  God  and  is  adjudged  by 
him.  Therefore  there  is  no  diminution  of  the  punishment 
by  an  increase  of  love.  But  after  it  is  computed  by  the 
priest's  official  act,  it  is  before  the  bar  of  the  Church,  so 
that  thereafter  God  does  not  extend  it  beyond  the  priest's 
computation.  Therefore  the  diminution  of  the  remaining 
punishment  must  not  be  attributed  to  an  increase  of  love, 
and  on  this  account  the  pope  has  authority  over  it.  Yet 
you  assert  this  opinion  timorously;  for  you  add:  "Not 
that  its  decision  lies  with  the  pope,  so  that  whatever  he 
decrees  in  such  matters  holds  at  the  bar  of  God,  because 
the  pope  so  willed  it.     Not  that  the  pope  can  remit  that 


Wessel  to  Jacob  Hoeck  315 

punishment  at  the  pleasure  of  his  will. "  Here  it  seems  to 
me  that  you  quite  admit  that  the  contrary  assertion  is  very 
rash.  But  consider  whether  it  is  any  less  dangerous  to 
assert  what  you  then  add,  viz.,  "But  because  the  pope 
can  render  satisfaction  for  such  a  person  out  of  the  treasure 
of  the  Church  and  can  evidently  substitute  of  Christ's 
sufferings  for  those  punishments  that  have  been  computed 
by  the  priest  and  are  thereby  already  brought  before  the 
bar  of  the  Church.  " 

At  this  point — using  your  own  words — I  ask  you  whether 
the  fruits  of  the  sufferings  of  our  Lord  lie  so  entirely 
at  the  pope's  disposal,  that  whatever  he  decrees  concern- 
ing their  merit  will  on  that  account  hold  before  the  bar 
of  God.  Does  their  merit  therefore  avail  before  the  bar 
of  God  only  for  the  person  whom  the  pope  chooses,  so 
that  no  one  else  can  be  the  recipient  of  the  accumulation 
of  the  Lord's  sufferings?  And  does  this  follow  simply 
because  the  pope  wills  it,  so  that — at  his  pleasure — by 
merely  granting  the  sinner  an  adequate  part  of  the  Lord's 
sufferings,  he  can  remit  his  punishment,  which  you  assert, 
because  of  the  confessor's  computation,  has  become  a 
matter  for  the  Church  to  determine  ? 

If  you  say  that  he  can  remit  the  punishment,  not  at  his 
pleasure,  but  by  his  right,  I  ask:  By  what  right,  unless  it 
be  that  of  mercy  and  righteousness,  as  God  in  justice  and 
mercy  abolishes  the  past  sins  of  the  penitent  and  accepts 
him  on  account  of  truly  present  love,  and  in  so  doing  makes 
him  a  sharer  of  that  great  whole  burnt  offering,  incense, 
and  treasure?  But  how  can  the  pope  do  this,  if  the  sinner 
does  not  so  much  as  esteem  this  treasure  ?  For  a  treasure 
implies  esteem, — and  that  too  most  worthy  esteem.  No 
one,  however  endowed  with  imperial  or  papal  authority, 
can  give  a  treasure  to  a  man  who  does  not  esteem  it. 
But  whether  a  person  worthily  or  unworthily  esteems  the 
treasure  of  the  Church  cannot  be  determined  of  a  cer- 


3i6  Wessel  Gansfort 

tainty  by  the  pope,  as  regards  another  or  indeed  himself. 
Moreover  if  anyone  worthily  esteems  that  treasure,  he 
will  obtain  it  and  share  in  it,  whether  the  pope  presents  it 
to  him  or  not.  Hence  ultimately  such  temporal  punish- 
ments remain  to  be  computed  only  at  the  bar  of  God, 
although  godly  obediende  on  the  part  of  those  under  the 
authority  of  the  Church  in  humbly  submitting  for  God's 
sake  to  ecclesiastical  computation  is  acceptable  to  God 
and  not  unfruitful  in  His  sight. 

My  opinion  concerning  participation  in  the  treasure  of 
the  Church  is  this:  I  judge  that  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Spirit, — the  triune  and  one  God,  the  Word  incarnate,  the 
only  begotten  of  God,  who  became  the  first-born  among 
many  brothers,  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  King  of  the  Jews,  Jesus 
Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God,  who  by  the  intervention 
of  death  became  the  covenant, — he  is  the  treasure  of  the 
Church.  Every  man  esteems  this  treasure  just  so  far  as 
he  knows  and  loves  it.  And  in  so  far  as  he  knows,  es- 
teems, and  loves  this  treasure,  so  far  he  is  restored  to  the 
image  of  God  and  Christ  is  formed  in  him.  For  it  is  only 
through  three  things  that  we  become  participants  in  that 
treasure,  viz.  by  knowing  the  true  God  and  Jesus  Christ 
whom  he  sent  and  the  Holy  Spirit, — by  knowing,  I  say, 
and  esteeming  and  loving  him.  I  do  not  see  that  I  here 
use  the  word,  "treasure, "  in  any  other  sense  than  that  in 
which  all  the  Doctors  of  the  Church  should  use  the  words, 
"treasure"  and  "participation. "  If  I  do,  I  beg  you,  show 
me  wherein.  I  have  elucidated  my  opinion  as  clearly  as 
I  can.  And  I  rejoice  not  a  little  at  this  your  opinion  of  my 
perverseness,  on  account  of  which  you  openly  assert  I 
take  issue  with  the  Doctors  in  general,  not  as  to  the  fact, 
but  merely  as  to  the  words.  For  I  regard  it  as  a  most 
desirable  thing  to  agree  with  the  rest  of  the  assemblage  of 
Doctors,  if  the  Scriptures  are  kept  inviolate  throughout. 
All  agree  with  me,  in  the  first  place,  that  the  pope  cannot 


Wessel  to  Jacob  Hoeck  317 

bestow  grace  upon  anyone;  secondly,  that  he  cannot 
decide  whether  he  himself  or  anyone  else  is  in  a  state  of 
grace;  thirdly,  much  less  can  he  command  that  anyone 
should  be  in  a  state  of  grace.  Truly  he  would  be  in  very 
great  grace,  if  he  could  efficaciously  impart  treasure  to  the 
needy  inner  man !  For  in  that  case  the  latter  would  wisely 
discern  the  treasure,  he  would  gloriously  and  sublimely 
esteem  it,  he  would  ardently  love  it. 

And  after  this  you  inconsistently  object — as  though  it 
were  a  strong  point — that  you  cannot  see  how  my  con- 
clusion can  be  deduced  from  these  concessions;  as  if  I 
deduced  it  from  these  three  alone!  Did  I  not  set  as  the 
basis  of  my  position  the  perfect  fulfillment  and  necessary 
observance  of  the  first  and  great  commandment,  together 
with  stedfast  perseverance  in  it  even  until  the  day  of  the 
Lord  ?  Did  I  not  say  that  whatever  is  contained  in  Sacred 
Scripture,  either  concerning  the  use  of  a  sacrament  or 
concerning  the  authority  of  the  ministers  of  the  Church 
or  concerning  the  efficacy  of  both,  depends  upon  these  two 
commandments  for  its  interpretation  and  limitation? 
Did  I  not  say  that  perfect  purity  of  heart  was  essential  for 
entrance  into  the  kingdom?  Did  I  not  say  that  plenary 
indulgences  are  conditioned  upon  this  one  thing — perfect 
participation  in  the  heavenly  Jerusalem,  and  that  perfect 
participation  is  conditioned  upon  perfect  desire  and  love  ? 
Did  I  not  base  entrance  into  the  marriage  chamber  upon 
the  perfect  preparation  and  adornment  of  the  bride?  Did 
I  not  base  perfect  impunity  upon  perfect  immunity  from 
sin?  Did  I  not  in  view  of  these  considerations  say  that 
the  pope  cannot  decree  entire  impunity  for  anyone, 
because  he  cannot  find  anyone  free  from  sin  in  this 
life, — for,  though  he  may  be  truly  contrite  and  may 
have  made  confession, — yet  he  is  not  perfectly  contrite? 
And  this  not  even  the  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved  pre- 
sumed to  affirm,  for  he  said,  "If  we  say  that  we  have 


3i8  Wessel  Gansfort 

no  sin,  we  deceive  ourselves,  and  the  truth  is  not  in 
us." 

From  these  statements,  together  with  the  three  which 
you  grant  are  generally  admitted  and  conceded,  I  think 
my  conclusion  can  be  deduced,  unless  perhaps  the  Doctors 
in  general,  even  after  fully  admitting  these  to  be  stronger, 
say  that  indulgences  still  remain  sound.  But  if  they  think 
so,  I  congratulate  them,  and  not  only  admit  but  bewail  and 
lament  my  own  ignorance,  in  that  I  do  not  see  how,  if 
these  ten  points  stand,  the  course  of  indulgences,  which  is 
customary  in  the  Church  and  is  so  zealously  and  recklessly 
asserted,  can  stand  secure.  All  these  things,  which  I  have 
mentioned,  are  necessary  in  such  perfection  that  human 
vision  is  dimmed  at  the  thought  of  it;  and  the  pope  has 
no  power  to  effect  their  perfection.  But  when  they  are 
perfect,  aside  from  any  intervention  of  the  pope,  they  will 
forthwith  secure  absolute  impunity. 

CHAPTER  XII 

I  ask  you  to  show  me  how  the  opposite  of  my  conclusion 
can  be  true  in  view  of  these  statements.  Ability  to  prove 
a  point  is  evidence  of  knowledge.  You  say  that  the  Pope 
can  bestow  plenary  indulgence,  if  the  necessity  requires  it. 
I  ask:  What  would  be  such  a  necessity?  Could  it  arise 
outside  the  sphere  of  the  universal  Church,  when,  for  ex- 
ample, it  becomes  necessary  to  repel  by  arms  the  military 
invasions  of  infidels  ?  I  do  not  think  you  can  maintain  any 
such  necessity  on  account  of  the  many  dreadful  things  that 
occur  under  such  conditions ;  for  they  are  almost  necessar- 
ily venial.  Or  perhaps  it  is  the  rebuilding  or  restoration 
of  some  sacred  edifice  that  has  been  ruthlessly  destroyed. 
I  do  not  think  you  can  be  of  this  opinion  either.  Even 
if  it  were  necessary  to  build  up  some  monastery  of  cele- 
brated sanctity,  and  men  were  actually  devoting  all  their 


Wessel  to  Jacob  Hoeck  319 

means  for  the  maintenance  of  these,  I  do  not  think  that 
would  be  a  sufficient  reason  to  grant  them  plenary  indul- 
gence, so  that  they  might  escape  immediately  to  heaven. 
Especial  attention  should  be  directed  to  these  words  of 
yours,  "if  the  necessity  requires  it. "  For  if  the  necessity 
requires  it,  and  the  pope  should  not  grant  the  indulgence, 
will  such  a  just  necessity  on  this  account  be  deprived  of  its 
lawful  right  ?  Perhaps,  then,  some  cause  within  the  sphere 
of  the  Church  will  require  it.  But  whatever  it  may  be, — 
aside  from  the  hinge  of  perfect  love,  on  which  it  must 
depend  and  to  which  it  must  hold  perfectly, — I  say  that 
I  cannot  faithfully  believe  or  truly  admit  that,  because  of 
it,  the  pope  can  bestow  plenary  indulgence  upon  anyone, 
— no  matter  what  its  importance  or  nature  may  be. 

CHAPTER  XIII 

You  say  that  the  truly  contrite,  when  they  are  released 
from  the  flesh,  if  they  are  fortified  with  papal  indulgences, 
will  forthwith  take  flight  to  heaven.  I  am  surprised  that 
you,  a  most  learned  man,  do  not  remember  that  that  ter- 
rible fire  is  endowed  with  reason,  because  the  fiery  law  in 
the  hand  of  God  must  be  written  in  our  hearts;  and  that 
it  will  prove  each  man's  worth.  According  to  Augustine 
De  Verbis  Domini,  Sermon  112,  it  is  clearly  a  fire  endowed 
with  reason,  proving  each  man's  work  by  rational  disci- 
phne,  burning  up  the  wood,  hay,  stubble,  i.  e.  every  evil 
affection;  De  Civitate  Dei,  Book  XXI,  Chapter  26.  For 
surely  it  must  be  admitted  that  this  is  the  spiritual 
foundation  of  which  Paul  speaks.  And  the  things  that 
are  lawfully  built  upon  it,  the  silver,  gold,  and  costly 
stone,  are  not  corporeal.  Hence  those  things  which  are 
built  upon  it  contrary  to  the  law  of  spiritual  building,  the 
wood,  hay,  stubble,  will  not  be  corporeal,  but  spiritual. 
But  if  these  seven  things  are  spiritual,  pray  how  can  men 


320  Wessel  Gansfort 

be  so  foolish  and  mad  as  to  dream  that  the  eighth,  i.  e. 
the  fire,  which  is  to  prove  each  man's  work  within  him, 
is  corporeal?  Can  corporeal  fire  in  any  way  discern  or 
prove  the  works  of  the  inner  man,  that  are  built  upon  that 
one  foundation, — works  which  it  cannot  know?  I  think 
that  the  evil  affections  constitute  love  that  is  still  imper- 
fect in  those  that  are  freed  from  the  flesh.  St.  Bernard, 
in  his  treatise  De  Diligendo  Deum,  admits  that  he  had  not 
yet  attained  love  in  such  perfection,  as  to  be  altogether 
devoid  of  self-love  except  for  God's  sake.  I  think  there- 
fore that  in  those  who  have  been  released  from  the  flesh 
love  must  increase,  and  become  as  different  from  and  un- 
like itself  as  the  heavens  differ  from  the  earth,  and  as 
perfect  as  is  the  perfect  day  compared  with  the  light  of  a 
lamp;  in  accordance  with  the  word,  "The  path  of  the 
righteous  is  as  the  light  that  increases  unto  the  perfect 
day." 

And  further  I  think  that  it  is  on  account  of  this  unlike- 
ness  that  the  Lord  Jesus  compared  the  kingdom  of  heaven 
to  a  mustard  seed  and  to  the  sphere  of  heaven.  He  also 
attested  this  when  he  said  concerning  John  the  Baptist, 
"He  that  is  lesser  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  greater  than 
he.  "  How  much  greater  ?  Surely  as  much  as  the  midday 
is  brighter  than  the  light  of  a  lamp.  I  admit,  with  you, 
that  those  that  are  freed  from  the  flesh  bum  with  far  greater 
love  than  that  with  which  John  the  Baptist  glowed  here 
on  earth,  in  proportion  to  the  clearer  wisdom  with  which 
they  are  illuminated  under  the  great  shepherd  and  bishop 
of  their  souls,  and  in  proportion  to  their  more  eager  dis- 
cernment of  the  praise  and  glory  of  God  under  the  clear 
thundering  of  him  who  comes  and  knocks  and  is  imme- 
diately admitted ;  so  much  more  fervent  is  the  fire  of  their 
love.  For  although  John,  while  on  the  earth,  was  greater 
than  many  even  most  holy  men,  yet  he  was  only  a  lamp. 

All  who  die  in  grace,  who,  before  they  are  released  from 


Wessel  to  Jacob  Hoeck  321 

the  flesh,  watching  by  the  light  of  a  lamp,  look  for  the 
Lord, — who  are  ready  to  receive  him  with  expectation 
when  they  hear  him  knocking,  and  opening  at  once  to 
him  receive  him  for  whom  they  have  waited  with  great 
longing, — these  exchange  the  light  of  the  lamp  for  the 
morning  star,  for  the  light  of  the  day-star  rising  within 
them.  And  under  his  happy  leadership  and  favor,  in 
order  that  they  may  grow  worthily,  they  pray  with  Sime- 
on— that  they  may  be  released  from  the  flesh,  and  with 
the  thief  who  was  received  into  grace — that  they  may  be 
received  into  paradise.  There,  God  himself,  as  Ezekiel 
promises  in  the  34th  chapter  of  his  Eulogium,  searches  for 
his  sheep  and  seeks  them  out.  "As  a  shepherd  seeketh 
out  his  flock  in  the  day  that  he  is  among  his  sheep  that 
are  scattered  abroad,  so  will  he  seek  out  his  sheep;  and 
will  deliver  them  out  of  all  places  whither  they  have  been 
scattered  in  the  cloudy  and  dark  day;  and  he  will  bring 
them  out  from  the  peoples,  and  gather  them  from  the 
countries,  and  will  bring  them  into  their  own  land ;  and  he 
will  feed  them  upon  the  mountains  of  Israel,  by  the  water 
courses  and  in  all  the  inhabited  places  of  the  country. 
He  will  feed  them  with  good  pasture ;  and  upon  the  lofty 
mountains  of  Israel  shall  their  fold  be :  there  shall  they  rest 
in  the  green  grass,  and  on  fat  pasture  shall  they  feed  upon 
the  mountains  of  Israel."  The  Lord  Jesus  himself,  their 
shepherd,  shall  feed  his  sheep  and  shall  cause  them  to  lie 
down.  That  which  was  sound  among  them  he  will  cherish 
and  that  which  was  not  sound  he  will  cure,  seeking  for 
that  which  was  lost,  bringing  back  that  which  was  driven 
away,  binding  up  that  which  was  broken,  and  strengthen- 
ing that  which  was  weak,  guarding  that  which  was  fat 
and  strong,  feeding  them  in  justice. 

Hence  the  same  shepherd  and  judge,  even  the  faithful 

■  shepherd  David,  who  was  after  the  Lord's  heart,  doing 

the  whole  will  of  God,  shall  feed  the  sheep  in  God's  flock 


322  Wessel  Gansfort 

until  the  dawn  shall  give  place  to  the  break  of  day,  and 
both  dawn  and  daybreak  shall  give  place  to  the  rising  sun. 
And  then  first  shall  the  kingdom  be  handed  over  to  God 
by  the  shepherd  David,  who  shall  at  the  last — after  the 
universal  judgment — hand  it  over  to  him  altogether  per- 
fect. 

This  sequence  in  the  guidance  of  souls  from  the  lamp- 
light of  our  present  exile,  in  which  the  feeble  wisdom  of 
our  faith  is  as  a  grain  of  mustard  seed,  and  as  a  small 
center  which  must  increase  to  the  immensity  of  the  celes- 
tial sphere, — this  universal  progress  and  happy  growth  of 
souls  up  to  the  rising  sun, — this  I  think  is  purification. 
And  I  think  that  in  this  purification  there  is  no  punish- 
ment,— which  is  profitable  for  a  little, — but  that  there  is 
godliness,  which  is  profitable  for  all  things,  and  that  that 
godliness  is  essentially  purgatorial.  Nevertheless  god- 
liness— nay  the  burning  love  that  has  been  deferred — has 
its  own  weakness  and  punishment.  It  has  also  its  happy 
consolation.  It  is  consoled  by  the  presence  of  the  Shep- 
herd and  Saviour.  But  because  of  the  Teacher  and 
Evangelist  sent  by  the  Father,  teaching  them  the  love 
with  which  he  himself  loved  and  loves  the  Father,  they 
too,  imitating  that  love  of  his,  begin  also  to  glow  with  love. 

But  since  they  do  not  yet  love  worthily,  they  are  still 
deferred  and  their  soul  is  afflicted.  This  affliction  is  not 
grief,  but  sadness  in  accordance  with  God's  will,  and  this, 
as  though  springing  from  the  love  of  God,  is  so  efficacious 
that  it  results  in  the  growth  of  their  love.  And  the 
sadder  it  is,  the  holier  it  is,  and  the  greater  is  the  growth 
of  love  that  it  secures. 

Nor  do  I  think  that  the  happiness  of  paradise  is  any 
the  less  because,  though  there  is  a  certain  happy  dwelling 
there  at  first,  it  is  not  a  blessed  abode  that  will  remain  for- 
ever. For  I  believe  that  the  first  and  great  command- 
ment, that  was  laid  upon  Adam  and  Eve,   as  well  as 


Wessel  to  Jacob  Hoeck  323 

upon  the  angels  and  ourselves,  was  to  render  service,  not 
to  be  idle.  Therefore  in  accordance  with  this  law  they 
would  at  least  fight  against  self,  and  hence  in  accordance 
with  this  law  they  would  offer  a  peace  offering,  sacrifice, 
burnt  offering,  and  incense  of  themselves  to  God.  For 
unless  they  are  prepared  both  to  do  and  to  suffer,  they  do 
not  make  a  blameless  offering.  A  happy  dwelling  there, 
not  a  state  of  blessedness,  was  promised  to  our  first  par- 
ents. Nay  if  they  had  continued  to  be  stedfast  there,  with 
favoring  wind  and  prosperous  voyage  they  would  have 
hastened  on,  making  great  advance  in  perfecting  love 
toward  an  abiding  place  of  permanent  citizenship.  As 
it  was  then,  so  also  now  and  always,  it  is  necessary  to  be 
cleansed  by  the  light  of  the  rising  dawn  and  the  breaking 
day,  until— shining  with  the  perfect  wisdom  of  God,  gleam- 
ing with  perfect  praise  of  God,  and  burning  with  perfect 
love  of  God— they  shall  be  judged  worthy  of  seeing  God, 
not  in  their  own  judgment  nor  any  human  judgment,  but 
only  by  the  decision  of  God  who  accepts  them.  And  thus 
shall  come  that  festal  wedding  day  and  that  blessed  en- 
trance into  the  marriage  chamber,  to  which  no  immature, 
youthful,  menstruous  concubine,  burning  with  imperfect 
love,  is  admitted  as  worthy  of  it. 

These  things,  most  venerable  Master,  are  more  easily 
understood  by  those  who  are  not  unfamiliar  with  the  opin- 
ion held  by  the  Nominalists  concerning  the  intension  of 
step  to  step;  just  as  the  addition  of  part  to  part  is  summed 
up  in  extension.  For  they  place  the  advancement  of 
step  to  step  in  intension,  and  hence  they  think  that  every- 
thing has  been  arranged  intensively,  while  the  Peripa- 
tetics think  that  everything  is  continuously  arranged  by 
the  addition  of  part  to  part  in  extension.  By  adopting 
the  view  of  the  Nominalists  it  becomes  easy  to  understand 
that  which  should  be  taught,  viz.  that  we  ought  to  grow  in 
love, — not  love  that  shall  pass  away,  but  love  that  shall 


324  Wessel  Gansfort 

abide  both  here  and  hereafter.  It  is  necessary,  however, 
that  there  should  be  a  very  large  growth,  before  the  im- 
mensity of  that  heavenly  sphere  shall  grow  out  of  the 
grain  of  mustard  seed  and  before  that  midday  light  shall 
burst  out  of  the  small  light  of  the  lamp.  But  no  matter 
how  much  men  may  grow,  as  long  as  there  is  any  love  of 
self  in  them,  which  prevents  them  from  loving  God, 
theirs  is  an  evil  affection,  imperfect  in  love.  For  perfect 
love  seeketh  not  its  own. 

Nor  should  we  attribute  this  love~of  self  to  the  flesh. 
For  such  love  of  self  in  the  highest  degree  is  found  in  him 
who  is  king  over  all  the  sons  of  pride;  and  yet  he  has 
neither  flesh  nor  blood.  This  love  of  self,  however  small, 
is  nevertheless  termed  evil  by  Augustine,  as  mentioned 
above.  For  it  constitutes  the  spot  in  the  wedding  gar- 
ment, it  obscures  one's  crown,  it  mars  the  likeness  and 
greatness  of  God.  For  what  is  more  unlike  God  than  to 
love  anything  else  but  God — and  not  for  God's  sake,  since 
God  loves  nothing  except  for  his  own  sake?  I  said  the 
splendor  of  that  kingdom,  the  brilliance  of  the  marriage 
chamber,  and  the  sanctity  of  the  temple  were  polluted  by 
these  spots,  by  these  blemishes,  and  on  account  of  this 
unlikeness, — as  when  anybody,  being  thus  polluted  and 
menstruous  in  spite  of  the  true  confession  and  contrition 
by  which  we  are  received  into  grace,  is  put  unworthily  and 
entirely  at  random  into  the  marriage  chamber  or  temple, 
being  sent  through — or  rather  thrust  in — by  the  pope. 
Nor  does  Augustine  think  that,  as  soon  as  the  flesh  is  laid 
aside,  all  evil  affections  are  laid  aside  with  it,  and  that 
every  imperfection  of  love  passes  at  the  same  time  into  per- 
fect love.  And  in  this  he  is  supported  by  William  of  Paris 
— see  Part  First,  Chapter  lOO, — where  he  maintains  his 
opinion  at  great  length  and  with  many  arguments.  Hence 
I  believe  that  these  evil  affections  are  the  sins  which  will 
be  forgiven  in  a  future  age.     Even  there  they  cannot  say 


Wessel  to  Jacob  Hoeck  325 

they  have  no  sin,  until  the  sun  of  perfect  righteousness  shall 
rise  for  them.  Indeed  I  do  not  yet  see  by  what  point  of 
the  rule  of  faith  the  counter  proposition  can  be  established. 
Hence  I  am  exceedingly  surprised  at  the  general  care- 
lessness of  the  Doctors  of  our  School  in  not  being  influenced 
by  the  authority  of  the  Fathers  of  the  early  Church  to  dis- 
tinguish purgatorial  from  punitive  fire.  Gregory  Nazian- 
zen  speaks  of  a  purgatorial  fire  which  the  Lord  Jesus  sent 
to  the  earth,  desiring  that  it  should  burn.  And  since  this 
fire  is  to  purify  the  mental  impurity  of  imperfect  knowl- 
edge, of  imperfect  conceptions  of  God,  and  of  imperfect 
righteousness,  it  will  have  to  be  capable  of  reasoning. 
Paul  also  intimates  this  when  he  says  that  that  fire  shall 
"prove";  now  if  it  proves,  it  surely  knows  each  man's 
work  of  what  sort  it  will  be.  But  he  speaks  of  punitive 
fire  as  that  which  is  prepared  for  the  devil  and  his  angels. 
For  it  is  taking  a  very  unusual  and  strange  freedom  with 
words  to  say  that  the  fire  purifies,  if  it  removes  nothing 
that  is  impure.  It  would  be  as  strange  a  use  of  words  as 
to  say  that  a  cure  is  effected  by  that  which  takes  away  a 
sickness  that  neither  exists  nor  impends.  It  is  doing 
violence  to  words  if  the  names  of  active  states  cannot  be 
defined  by  the  mention  or  measure  of  the  loss  of  their 
opposites.  The  fire  is  not  only  termed  "purgatorial"  by 
Latin  writers,  but  it  is  called  nadaptinov  nvp  by  Greek 
writers.  In  both  cases  the  term  "fire"  and  "purgatorial" 
is  used  figuratively.  But  every  figure  is  based  upon  a  like- 
ness. And  a  likeness  rests  upon  a  reasonable  intelligence. 
Hence  he  that  rejects  it,  makes  war  upon  nature. 

And  you  add:  "the  soul  which  has  gained  plenary  in- 
dulgences, provided  one  dies  in  that  state."  I  ask:  In 
what  state?  In  the  state,  in  which  one,  who  is  truly  con- 
trite and  has  confessed  and  been  truly  restored  to  grace, 
has  gained  indulgences?  I  ask  whether  he  gains  plenary 
indulgences,  if  he  has  venial  sins  at  the  very  time  when  he 


326  Wessel  Gansfort 

is  obtaining  them?  If  so,  then  he  will  pass  through  with 
wood,  hay,  stubble  built  upon  the  foundation,  and  without 
being  proved  by  the  fire ;  and  this  would  be  in  violation  of 
the  Apostle's  law.  If  you  say,  he  has  no  venial  sins,  then 
no  one  will  gain  plenary  indulgence  in  this  life,  "for  in 
many  things  we  all  stumble."  And  "if  we  say"  even  in 
the  act  of  repenting,  "that  we  have  no  sin,  we  deceive 
ourselves  and  the  truth  is  not  in  us. "  For  not  one  of  us 
fulfills  the  first  commandment  perfectly,  no  matter  with 
what  sincere  confession  or  self-examination  he  receives 
the  sacrament.  Moreover  we  are  commanded  to  pray 
always,  "Forgive  us  our  debts."  Therefore  we  always 
remain  and  are  debtors,  and  our  debts  will  never  be  for- 
given perfectly  until  we  love  perfectly. 

You  say,  "provided  one  dies  in  that  state."  Again  I 
ask:  In  what  state?  In  the  state  of  imperfect  love,  of 
many  debts  and  venial  sins,  when  he  was  gaining  plenary 
indulgences,  or  rather  when,  deceived  by  an  error — inas- 
much as  he  was  in  a  state  of  imperfect  love — he  believed 
he  was  gaining  plenary  indulgence?  You  wisely  have  a 
proper  scruple  about  subsequent  venial  sins,  admitting 
that  they  will  annul  preceding  indulgences.  Why  have 
not  you  a  like  scruple  about  the  venial  sins  that  accom- 
pany them  during  the  process  of  obtaining  them?  Will 
existing  sins  make  an  indulgence  void  any  more  than 
future  sins?  Who  is  there  that  in  confession  even  re- 
membered all  his  venial  sins, — not  to  speak  of  worthily 
confessing  and  being  contrite  for  them?  And  if  he  re- 
members them  of  what  use  would  it  be  so  long  as  he  does 
not  detest  them  with  perfect  zeal?  And  how  can  he  be 
perfectly  zealous,  if  he  does  not  yet  love  perfectly?  How 
was  he  possessed  of  perfect  love,  if  he  falls  again  afterwards? 
Who  has  not  transgressed  venially  in  the  interval  between 
the  sacramental  and  the  indulgential  act?  Indeed  it  is 
on  account  of  this  very  scruple  that  certain  men,  in  order 


Wessel  to  Jacob  Hoeck  z-1 

to  strengthen  indulgences  and  not  be  compelled  to  grant 
that  they  are  invalid,  used  to  say  that  the  pope  can  even 
remit  venial  sin.  For  truly,  if  he  cannot  do  this,  he  will 
not  be  able  to  grant  any  one  plenary  indulgence,  because 
he  cannot  declare  anyone  to  be  free  from  venial  sin. 
But  that  he  cannot  forgive  venial  sins  is  quite  clear. 
For  no  one  forgives  sins  of  any  sort  whatever  without 
efficaciously  imparting  the  opposite  virtues,  just  as  no 
one  takes  away  blindness  and  its  disadvantages  without 
granting  vision  and  perfection  of  sight.  For  it  is  only  to 
him  that  loveth  much  that  many  sins  are  forgiven. 

Very  pertinent  here  is  the  question  which  certain  per- 
sons raise,  whether  Eugene  IV  was  right  in  showing  anxiety 
and  pious  solicitude  to  have  it  understood  that  all  such 
plenary  indulgences  were  to  be  adjudged  at  the  last 
moment  of  death  to  those  who  depart  in  grace, — and  only 
for  the  final  instant,  in  order  that  they  might  not  sin 
venially  afterwards.  For  thus  only  would  there  be  no 
hindrance  to  their  enjoyment  of  the  indulgences,  on 
account  of  the  obstacles  of  subsequent  sins.  You  too 
believe  that  on  account  of  the  same  obstacle  of  subsequent 
venial  sins  scarcely  one  out  of  one  hundred  thousand  souls 
escape.     But  why  then  is  not  this  truth  preached  publicly  ? 

Nor  do  I  like  your  idea  that  sins,  which  are  not  confessed 
by  reason  of  an  unconscious  error  of  carelessness  or  for- 
getfulness,  ought  to  be  punished;  as  though  unconfessed 
sins  were  not  forgiven  when  over  against  them  a  man's 
love  and  sense  of  duty  render  him  acceptable  to  God. 
For  no  confession  removes  sin,  so  long  as  it  does  not  render 
one  dutiful  through  love.  Besides  as  a  result  of  your 
position  it  would  follow  that  these  unconfessed  sins  remain 
to  be  imputed  unto  the  sinner  in  a  future  age  not  only  for 
punishment,  but  also  for  guilt.  Here  you  are  truly 
generous  with  me  in  admitting  that  no  one  can  forgive  the 
venial  sins  that  remain.     And  you  are  still  more  generous, 


328  Wessel  Gansfort 

when  you  add,  "if  he  is  perfectly  contrite, "  as  if  you  agreed 
with  me  that  a  person  can  be  truly  contrite,  who  is  not 
perfectly  contrite.  And  if  the  pope  or  a  School  should 
say  that  a  perfectly  contrite  person  escapes  immediately 
through  plenary  remission,  I  should  not  be  at  all  surprised. 
But  I  should  be  surprised  if  the  pope  causes  him  to  escape. 

You  are  exceedingly  honest  in  setting  forth  the  general 
opinion,  by  saying  that — "according  to  all  the  authorities, 
contrition  may  be  so  great  as  to  wipe  out  all  guilt  and 
punishment. "  But  here  I  ask  your  opinion  as  to  this 
question :  How  great  will  such  contrition  be?  Will  it  be  so 
great  that,  in  accordance  with  Gerson's  belief  as  expressed 
above,  he  will  be  absolutely  prepared  to  do  all  good  and  to 
suffer  all  evil?  For  Gerson  said  that  such  contrition  is 
the  surest  sign  of  indulgences.  On  the  other  hand  is  not 
contrition  usually  faint,  weak,  and  feeble  with  regard  to 
both  doing  and  suffering,  crippled  in  running  the  way  of 
God's  commandments,  yielding,  delicate,  shrinking  from 
suffering  for  Jesus'  sake?  Pardon  me  if  I  suspect  that 
most  persons  in  the  matter  of  repentance  are  like  myself. 
For  such  persons  I  know  there  is  need  of  much  remission ; 
nay,  not  much,  but  plenary  remission.  Yet  I  also  know 
that  they  will  not  obtain  plenary  remission,  so  long  as  they 
do  not  love  plenarily,  so  that  they  are  perfectly  prepared 
to  fulfil  both  of  Gerson's  conditions.  Whoever,  therefore, 
has  need  of  indulgences  because  of  such  imperfect  con- 
trition, still  has  imperfect  contrition.  No  contrition  is 
imperfect  except  on  account  of  imperfect  love. 

Again,  I  do  not  agree  with  you  in  holding  that  in  baptism 
an  adult  obtains  perfect  remission, — and  that  by  rule, — 
since  by  rule,  if  one  does  not  interpose  any  obstacle  to 
the  grace  of  God,  he  is  truly  quickened  in  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  his  sins  though  they  be  many  are  forgiven  the  culprit, 
if  he  loves  much.  But  if  in  baptism  and  afterwards  he 
loves  but  little,  I  judge  him  to  be  still  a  babe  in  Christ,  and 


Wessel  to  Jacob  Hoeck  329 

in  need  of  milk.  For  he  that  sins  venially  during  baptism, 
sins  indeed  venially  and  yet  is  truly  baptized.  But  in 
that  he  indeed  sins  venially,  he  builds  indeed  wood,  hay, 
stubble  upon  the  foundation.  Such  an  one,  therefore,  does 
not  build  the  throne  of  the  kingdom  with  gold,  silver, 
and  pure  costly  stones.  How  then  will  he  not  pass  through 
so  as  by  fire,  even  if  he  expires  immediately  after  the  bap- 
tism? How  likewise  would  not  his  imperfect  wisdom, 
imperfect  judgment,  and  imperfect  love,  which  by  rule 
are  granted  imperfectly  in  baptism,  constitute  an  imper- 
fect kingdom?  How  will  Christ  appear  perfectly  formed 
in  these  three  imperfect  parts  of  his  likeness?  Truly,  if 
he  does  not  there  love  otherwise  than  he  did  here  in  bap- 
tism, it  will  be  a  kingdom  of  languid  love,  built  up  with 
unseeing  wisdom,  wavering  judgment,  and  sordid  right- 
eousness. Paul  says  these  have  need  of  milk,  being 
unfit  for  solid  food  as  yet.  Peter  warns  them,  "as  new 
born  babes  to  long  for  the  milk  belonging  to  the  reason. " 
Paul  says  that  "so  long  as  the  heir  is  a  child,  he  differeth 
nothing  from  a  bond  servant,  but  ought  to  be  under 
guardians  and  stewards  until  the  day  appointed  of  the 
Father. "  And  what  is  that  day  appointed  of  the  Father 
but  the  day  of  perfect  conformity  to  the  example  shown 
upon  the  mountain?  For  Christ  suffered  for  us,  leaving 
us  an  example  that  we  may  follow  his  footsteps.  Indeed, 
because  he  suffered  for  us,  he  will  not  appear  in  us,  unless, 
by  the  example  he  left  us,  we  are  resolved,  and  are  quick- 
ened and  kindled  to  follow  his  footsteps, — and  follow 
them  perfectly.  And  when  we  fulfil  this  perfectly,  the 
day  appointed  of  the  Father  shall  come.  How  then  can 
it  be,  that  in  violation  of  the  law  appointed  of  the  Father, 
before  the  day  appointed,  and  contrary  to  His  will,  this 
babe  in  wisdom  shall  be  regarded  at  once  as  a  citizen  fit 
for  that  kingdom?  I  deem  it  unworthy  that,  at  that  table 
in  the  Father's  kingdom,  anyone  should  have  need  of 


330  Wessel  Gansfort 

milk,  as  though  he  were  as  lacking  in  wisdom  as  a  little 
child. 

I  too  at  the  end  of  my  letter  see  that  my  paper  is  failing. 
Therefore  I  close,  not  like  yourself, — distracted  because  I 
am  necessarily  occupied  in  the  interest  of  friends,  but 
because  I  am  entirely  overcome  by  habitual  laziness,  ex- 
cept in  so  far  as  I  am  urged  and  drawn  on  by  a  longing  for 
you.  Hence  also,  in  proportion,  not  to  my  longing,  but 
to  my  customary  sluggishness,  by  your  orders  I  have 
written  my  reply  more  than  quickly  and  only  in  accordance 
with  my  capacity  to  meet  my  opponent's  points,  indicat- 
ing those  things  on  which  we  either  agree  or  disagree.  I 
beg  and  beseech  you  that  with  reasons  and  authorities 
you  contend  with  me  to  hit  the  bowman's  target,  in  order 
that  thus  at  last  the  very  difficult  truth  in  these  assertions 
may  as  you  demand  be  more  readily  discovered.  I  admit 
that  you  have  not  the  leisure  that  I  have.  But  I  also 
lament  the  fact  that  in  my  sluggishness  I  have  not  the 
sharpness  that  you  possess.  Hence  the  task  is  not  as 
fruitless  to  me  as  to  you. 

I  exact  only  this  one  thing  of  you,  most  venerable  Lord, 
Dean,  and  Master,  viz.  that  you  hold  firmly  to  your  prom- 
ises that  you  will  not  postpone  writing  hereafter,  and  that 
as  soon  as  you  receive  my  letters,  you  will  not  be  slow  to 
answer.  Indeed,  you  have  now  promised  for  the  third 
time  that  you  would  reply  to  my  letters  either  personally 
or  by  dictating  a  little.  I  admit  I  urge  you  ill-advisedly 
only  if  you  think  your  own  words  are  ill-advised  for  your- 
self. 

And  now  our  most  venerable  and  dear  Master,  I  wish 
you  all  happiness.     Farewell. 

Written  at  Groningen,  September  19th,  by  your  Wessel. 


XIV 
letter  from  david  of  burgundy,  bishop  of  utrecht 

Beloved  Son,  Wessel: 

We  command  our  blessing  to  abide  ever  upon  you. 
We  would  have  you  know  that  we  need  you  here  in  person 
at  this  time  to  give  good  counsel  to  our  soul.  I  have  many 
about  me  who  esteem  you  greatly  for  your  learning  and 
character;  but  I  do  not  hear  them  teach  the  truths  that 
long  ago  you  were  accustomed  to  declare  so  faithfully. 

I  have  long  been  aware  of  your  brilliancy  as  a  teacher 
and  yet  I  know  that  there  are  many  who  are  seeking  to 
destroy  you.  This  shall  never  be  so  long  as  I  am  alive 
to  protect  you.  But  come  to  me  as  quickly  as  possible, 
that  I  may  talk  everything  over  with  you,  and  may  have 
with  me  one  in  whom  I  delight  my  soul. 
Farewell, 

I  am  the  unworthy  Bishop, 
Vollenhove,  David. 

On  the  eve  of  the  feast  of  Pontian, 
in  the  year  of  our  Lord,  1473. 


331 


XV 


ALEXANDER  HEGIUS  SENDS  GREETING  TO  THE  MOST  LEARNED 
AND  EXCELLENT  MASTER  WESSEL  OF  GRONINGEN, 
WHO  IS  "the  LIGHT  OF  THE  WORLD" 

I  AM  sending  you,  most  excellent  sir,  the  Homilies  of 
John  Chrysostom.  I  hope  the  reading  of  them  will  afford 
you  deHght.  For  golden  words  always  pleased  you  more 
than  golden  coin. 

I  have  been,  as  you  know,  in  the  Cusan  library.  There 
I  found  many  Hebrew  books,  altogether  unknown  to  me ; 
but  fewer  of  the  Greek.  The  following,  I  recall,  were  there : 
Epiphanius  against  Heresies,  a  very  large  work;  Diony- 
sius  on  the  Hierarchy;  Athanasius  against  Arius;  CHmacus; 
— these  I  left  there.  But  I  brought  with  me  Basil  on  the 
Hexaemeron  and  his  Homilies  on  the  Psalms ;  the  Epistles 
of  Paid  together  with  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles;  the  Lives 
of  certain  Romans  and  Greeks  written  by  Plutarch,  and 
also  his  Symposium ;  some  grammars ;  some  mathematical 
works ;  some  songs  of  deepest  feeling  concerning  the  Chris- 
tian religion,  composed  as  I  believe  by  Gregory  Nazianzen; 
some  prayers,  evxoti. 

If  you  want  any  of  these,  let  me  know;  they  shall  go  to 
you.  For  it  is  not  right  that  I  should  have  anything  that 
I  would  not  share  with  you.  If  it  will  not  inconvenience 
you  to  be  without  the  Greek  gospels,  I  beg  you  to  lend 
them  to  me.     You  ask  to  be  informed  about  my  tutoring. 

332 


Alexander  Hegius  to  Wessel  333 

I  have  followed  your  counsel.  For  all  learning  is  per- 
nicious that  is  attended  with  loss  of  honesty.  Farewell, 
and  if  you  want  me  to  do  anything,  signify  it  to  me  and 

consider  it  done. 

From  Deventer. 


o 
o 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  'rg,'|J'|^ 

0057103089 


^^/u 


